Adapting “face-to-face” education to distance/remote and/or online education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been a massive challenge for countries around the world. Online education reignited older debates about inclusive education, such as hoped-for universal access versus current digital divides, prompting the public to reflect about the past, the present, and future of the educational system. This article analyzes the Romanian public discourse, both scientific and non-scientific, on emerging distance and online education in Romania during the COVID-19 pandemic, in order to understand how public communication functioned as feedback for school digitalization. The paper charts the advantages and challenges of distance and online education experienced by various actors (teachers, students, and the members of civil society) or identified through scientific research, focusing on the way online education has spotlighted and reshaped social inequalities. We use thematic content analysis of 152 online articles published from March to June 2020 and eight scientific studies and reports. The results showed that public discourse about distance and online education was largely consistent within and across multiple stakeholders; also, the scientific reports were aligned with the other public opinions expressed and promoted via online channels. The general perspective of the emerging online education during COVID-19 is that it deepens the educational gaps and creates new forms of exclusion. On the positive side, some of the teachers have improved their teaching methods and educational content.
Background: Despite lacking scientific support, vaccine hesitancy is widespread. While serious vaccine damage as a scientific fact is real yet statistically highly uncommon, emerging social and technological forces have amplified perceptions of risk for "probable vaccine damage", making it a widely shared intersubjective reality. Methods: Using the Eurobarometer 91.2 survey on a statistically representative EU27-UK sample interviewed in March 2019, we documented perceptions of vaccine risks and identified three belief configurations regarding vaccine effectiveness, safety, and usefulness, through exploratory cluster analysis. Results: The public beliefs in significant vaccine risks are frequent. Approximatively one-tenth of the EU27-UK population consider that vaccines are not rigorously tested before authorization, one-third believe that vaccines can overload or weaken the immune system and that they can cause the disease against which they protect, and almost one-half believe that vaccines can cause serious side effects. We identified three belief configurations: hesitant, confident, and trade-off clusters. The hesitant type (approx. 11% of EU27-UK respondents) is defined by the perception that vaccines are rather ineffective, affected by risks of probable vaccine damage, not well-tested, and useless; the confident type (approx. 59%) is defined by beliefs that vaccines are effective, safe, well-tested, and useful; and the trade-off type (approx. 29%) combines beliefs that vaccines are effective, well-tested and useful, with perceptions of probable vaccine damage. The vaccine-confident and the trade-off types have similar vaccination histories, indicating the significant role of other factors besides beliefs in inducing behavior. Conclusions: The high proportion of varying public beliefs in significant vaccine risks and the presence of a trade-off type of vaccination assessment indicate the social normality of beliefs in probable vaccine damage. 3 Communication campaigns should take into account the social normality of the perceived risk of "probable vaccine damage" across various social types, and patterns of concomitant trust and mistrust in vaccination.
In this paper we argue that quantitative survey-based social research essentializes age, through specific rhetorical tools. We outline the device of 'socio-demographic variables' and we discuss its argumentative functions, looking at scientific survey-based analyses of adult scientific literacy, in the Public Understanding of Science research field. 'Socio-demographics' are virtually omnipresent in survey literature: they are, as a rule, used and discussed as bundles of independent variables, requiring little, if any, theoretical and measurement attention. 'Socio-demographics' are rhetorically effective through their common-sense richness of meaning and inferential power. We identify their main argumentation functions as 'structure building', 'pacification', and 'purification'. Socio-demographics are used to uphold causal vocabularies, supporting the transmutation of the descriptive statistical jargon of 'effects' and 'explained variance' into 'explanatory factors'. Age can also be studied statistically as a main variable of interest, through the Age-Period-Cohort (APC) disambiguation technique. While this approach has generated interesting findings, it did not mitigate the reductionism that appears when treating age as a socio-demographic variable. By working with age as a 'socio-demographic variable', quantitative researchers convert it (inadvertently) into a quasi-biological feature, symmetrical, as regards analytical treatment, with pathogens in epidemiological research.
Through its relation with biomedicine, its doctrine, consultation design, and treatment rituals, homeopathy offers a powerful medium to elicit a placebo response in a therapeutic alliance. By virtue of its proximity and radical difference from the scientific and biomedical enterprises, its material and textual organization, its storytelling and esthetics, homeopathy offers doctors and patients the opportunity and the tools to collaborate, to witness healing, and to hope for success against adversity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.