Education of tomorrow. Organization of school education

Education of tomorrow as an idea, scientific message to horizons of the desired systemic changes and of those in everyday life, it raises recognition and has hopes for implementation into the practice of the educational process, education, and care. In fact, the “Education of tomorrow” calls for the expectations and hopes that research, as a result of the criticism of imperfect mechanisms of reforms implementation, particularly at the turn of the twentieth and twenty-first century, will be continued and revitalized, including on the basis of the very educational research. Travestying of what years ago (1968) Cyprian Norwid wrote: “Past – it is today, but anything further; the future is today closer than it seems, where Time does his thing. And you, man?” – you should utilize it to improve education. In general, we mean the wider education including, among others, care from birth to old age, education focused on finding the hidden development potential in the richness of the directional and instrumental characteristics (values), often of innate abilities, corresponding with talent, as well as the preparation of learning related to changing social, professional and free time roles. Going back to the title of the multiauthored monograph, focused on the organization of school education, one should refer to its semantic content, since the term “organization” has a diversified credit. Well, according to sociologists, it is a social community of the school, but also of relationships and social bonds, according to psychologists it should be understood primarily in terms of activities aimed at improving the working conditions and efficiency, without losing sight of the employee and customer-student satisfaction. In turn, in the opinion of work pedagogists, the learning process, taking different forms geared towards a system of selection and management of people and work tools and of infrastructure, must be emphasized. In the “Education of tomorrow,” the specific roles established and implemented, though often hidden, are played by the teacher as a person. There is a need to clearly emphasize the term role playing, because too often is also used in relation to the school in terms of metaphor. Discussion on the idealization or criticism of metaphorical relating to roles of the teacher is important and meaningful, because in education practice, seldom do teachers have innovative and creative attitudes. This is because – as French sociologist Alain Touraine convinces: “the result of this process (aimed at the end of the society) is to receive content and meaning of the institutions of modern society, organized in nation-states. Even if there are political parties, trade unions, public institutions, they play less and less of a role in making sense of human life and the coordination of individuals and groups. They become simply points providing services to the public, more often, on a commercial basis. The population in the face of so changing institutions is transformed into consumer, individualization progresses.” Issues concerning the end of the society were also undertaken by Polish sociologist Mirosława Marody, paying attention to: 1) the economic success of the business unit and the State; 2) competitive resistance from the other values to build a world around a religious, ethnic, national community; 3) combining the opportunity to live in harmony with each other, on the basis of social life with autonomy and freedom of the individual. Jan Sowa also writes about the disease of capitalism and crisis of liberal democracy. This philosopher and sociologist exposes things that, as postulated models, generally do not lead to good results, e.g.: 1) pseudoliberalism involving modernization of the “cargo cult,” as the ability to copy infrastructural solutions of more developed countries; 2) neosarmatian conservatism looking for source of Polish force in the restoration projects of cultural and political codes of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth; 3) return to the idea of a new society as a social democratic state and society associated with the Solidarity movement, which broke out in 1980. Referring to the scientific paradigms about the crisis of capitalism, in the neo-liberal version and of initiated process leading to the end of the individualization of society and the individual as such, the matter of “Education of tomorrow” and the organization of school education, within the next decade will appear to be rather negative. It is true that from the point of view of metaphorical and deterministic chaos theory, the initial factors identified and causative elements list – are both extensive, but the unknown is probably even bigger, as is the need for discussions and initia¬tives in the form of practical measures. On the other hand, leaning over general and subject-specific didactics, also integrated in forms of assistance to a child with disabilities and their family, one should recognize the cognitive-ideological declarations and the real facts, including ones relating to the area of childcare (up to 3 years), preschool and school children as well as youth, pedagogization of parents, as well as clericalization of public life in schools. All this must arouse con¬cern, therefore, in the final part of this collective monograph we find an important dialogue on education and a description of the educational situ¬\ation in Sweden, where the principle of egalitarian democracy somehow complements the context of reflection on “Education of Tomorrow” and the organization of school education as such. Readers are encouraged for a deeper reflection on the multifaceted threads contained in the unique articles, as well as the Chinese proverb which says that it is easier to build a school as an institution, than to have good teachers and to continue to improve it. Kazimierz Wenta (Wstęp)