Yuriy Shvets.jpg

Assoc. Prof.Yuriy Shvets, Financial University under the Government of Russian Federation, Russia

Yuriy Shvets副教授,俄罗斯联邦政府金融大学,俄罗斯

Research Area: Economic values of health care system security, assessment of the quality of economic systems, methods of assessing the consumer basics of service value and social development of states


Title:  Correlation of socio-economic consequences of the external effects management of regional medical systems

Abstract: The events of the beginning of 2020 associated with the spread of COVID-19 showed fragmentation of management approaches in regulating the epidemiological stability of countries and territories. The 21st century showed the world such challenges as SARC/TORS, H5N1, N1H1, MERS, Ebola. Despite the dominant informational role of WHO in the necessity of evaluating the threat and implementing preventive measures to avoid the development of such threats, at some point all the activities are insufficient and stopping the pandemic locally is possible only by local actions without linking to neighbors.

The classic management approach requires action to maximize self-interest and, globally, this should lead to general well-being. It is quite possible that this logic is relevant both in Adam Smith's time and today, and some countries follow it (e.g. Italy or Israel), but in this case declared values and freedoms are replaced by social necessity, and this is new to society and can be perceived in various ways by different segments of the population (an example can be seen in actions in Ukraine).

Assuming that the target is for countries that are at risk, the solutions must be the same. Unfortunately, we can see the exact opposite picture. Countries that even belong to different governmental organizations act differently. It can be assumed that they are driven by a certain interest, which in theory is called "medial choice" associated with different shares of benefits and consequences from government actions in different time periods depending on the proximity or remoteness of the choice (as in Israel), or a high share of social responsibility as in China.

Prof.Victor Wang, Grand Canyon University, USA

Victor Wang教授,大峡谷大学,美国

Research Area: Education, teaching, pedagogy and research methodologies


Title:  A Comparison of Knowledge Creation through Different Philosophies in China and in the United States

Abstract: Facilitated by the explosion of technologies, globalization is the catalyst for many changes in society and its workings. Higher education is no exception in China and in the United States. In the present presentation from a teaching methods perspective (teaching philosophies), the author considers China's higher education system and the transformations it is undergoing, largely as a response to globalization. Given that the employment capabilities of graduates are influenced by teaching methods they experienced throughout their education, and in turn, once gaining employment graduates' capabilities make some on the nation, it is appropriate and useful to adopt a teaching methods perspective on educational transformation. Thus, to further understanding of the status of teaching methods and teaching philosophies in China, the presentation seeks to compare Chinese adult/higher education methods with Western educational methods. A conceptual framework of the principles of andragogy is used. The philosophical foundations of higher education are discussed. Bloom’s Taxonomy is also used. This presentation seeks to arouse intellectual interest among Chinese and American scholars whose research may focus on knowledge generation through different teaching philosophies. 

Supported by

Media Support

Indexing Information

Official Wechat