For parents who want their children with more advanced Chinese proficiency (say, Chinese AP score 4-5 or HSK level > 4) to try out learning Chinese partly by using the debate format, I shall attempt to provide differentiated read-aloud material based on this debate contest on 7/31/18 in Hong Kong between 正方: 台北市立中山女子高級中學 and 反方: 北京清華附中國際學校. The topic is 中學校園內禁止使用智慧型手機對學生發展利大於弊／弊大於利. Our USA team tied with the debaters from 北京清華附中國際學校 this July on a different topic and their debaters are all the same ones, except for 三辯.
Below are three levels of the first affirmative/pro speech 正ㄧ申論 and the first negative speech 反ㄧ申論, with the advanced level speech being the actual speech, delivered in 4 minutes. The actual speeches are 1411 and 1327 characters, which are a little fast for my taste. I would say my DD#2 can comfortably deliver 1,100 – 1,200 characters in 4 minutes. The three levels are differentiated mostly by the length of the speech, not difficulty of the characters and phrases. These debaters are mostly 8-10th graders and this topic is not academic. So, the language itself is fairly basic for native speakers, i.e. good to know for kids with more advanced Chinese in the international market.
You can convert these to simplified Chinese and add 注音 or 拼音 if you like.
(I am definitely not a Chinese language teacher, just a passionate parent with only 5th grade formal education in Taiwan. So, parents, please do due diligence and make sure I didn’t make any mistakes here. Please do let me know if you spot one. Thank you.)
首先，校園中的課堂已經不再是死板的課本教學。現在教師更加提倡多元化的，具有趣味性的課堂。而智能手機就可以很好地詮釋這新的課堂模式。美國的皮尤研究中心（Pew Research Center) 調查顯示，百分之七十三的美國教師及他們的學生不許用智能手機在課堂中參與教學活動。現在課堂已經不再僅僅限制於課本中的內容。中學生也不再是「兩耳不聞窗外事，一心只讀聖賢書」的書呆子了。手機可以使學生有了更加廣闊的學習範圍，用一種更加讓學生可以接受的趣味性教學，從而提高課堂對學生的吸引力。舉例說明，一者新出現的APP宇課堂就提供了這樣的學習環境。宇課堂可以讓老師上傳PPT，而學生只需要在ＡＰＰ上掃碼，就能看到老師上傳的課鑑。老師可以在宇課堂ＡＰＰ裡留課堂作業。它真正的亮點不僅在於可以共享老師講課的PPT，並留課堂作業，還在於學生可以把自己不理解的東西告訴老師。學生在翻看PPT的過程中，下方有一個不懂按鈕。如果學生沒有理解這張PPT所講解的，他就可以按下這個按鈕，而老師那裏可以清楚地看到那張PPT，有多少同學不理解，並可以瞭解到準確的有誰不理解。據調查顯示，大部分學生玩手機的原因，就是因爲比起枯燥的課堂，手機更加具有吸引力，而宇課堂的例子，不就正好解決了課堂的枯燥這一問題嗎？
正二申論 （Second affirmative speech), starting at around 18:40
Second affirmative speech is supposed to respond to any previous cross-examination and the first negative speech. So, it is more colloquial and has less previously prepared statements. I can comfortably divide it into two levels, based on length.
This is one topic that I find useful for teens to practice debating in Chinese. First, it is highly relevant to our teen’s lives here. Secondly, the entire concept is easy to grasp, without requiring research and comprehension of advanced topics. Thirdly, web resource is widely available for this discussion and I found many videos of English debate practices by what appears to be middle school students in the Indian subcontinents. Finally, it was one of the topics used for Group B Debate Asia in 2018, with video footage. For these reasons, I think this is an excellent topic for middle school students to delve into Chinese debate.
中學校園內禁止使用智慧型手機對學生發展利大於弊／弊大於利
Affirmative: The benefit of the prohibition of smartphone use in secondary school exceeds the harm for student development.
Negative: The harm of the prohibition of smartphone use in secondary school exceeds the benefit for student development.
Below are actual Debate Asia debate competition for Group B (16 & under, typically 14-16) in 2018. The first one is between Taiwan’s 中山女中 and PRC’s 清華附中國際學校. Our USA Atlanta team debated and tied with 清華國際學校 in July for our second topic, with these same debaters except for their third seat (三辯). For this topic, 中山女中 won the debate on the affirmative side.
Here is the same debate between 關丹中華 and 八打靈公教, two schools from Malaysia. Malaysia has about 7 million ethnic Chinese or about a quarter of the population. In this debate, 八打靈公教 took the negative side and won. As you can tell, these ethnic Chinese Malaysian are very fluent in their Chinese, with likely slight difference in usage and accent. 八打靈公教 was very kind to our USA team in July and did a friendly debate match with us for one of our topics. Our team learned a lot and got much better after that debate. There is nothing like an actual debate with another team to figure out some of one’s weaknesses.
Here are some English videos on this topic:
I searched online and found some useful sites for this debate.
Below are some background information, discussion, and debate scripts in either English or Chinese. I suggest that the students read what they can in English and Chinese. Then, they should type up their own scripts in English (or Chinese) for one or both sides of the topic – one page, single-spaced, 12 font size. Next, they can work on translating the work to Chinese if they prepared their scripts on English. The parent or coach assist the students as needed. These exercises teach them critical reading skill, writing skill, and then translation and Chinese typing skill. The parent coach can then provide the students with a more refined constructive speech with more advanced Chinese. Then, it is time to practice reading aloud till fluency. Then, debate practice using one format or another. I believe I provide almost everything that one needs to engage in an intelligent debate on this matter in Chinese. If you need to convert the Chinese from traditional to simplified or add phonetic assistance using 注音 or 拼音, you can do that separately. I firmly believe the skills learned in this or other similar exercises are invaluable, regardless of the language used.
Affirmative: We should ban smartphones from school
Less physical activity during recess
Kids spend most of their time sitting down in the classroom. Aside from gym class, a couple times a week, the only time they get to stretch their legs and exercise is during recess. What happens when you let children bring their phones to school? The obvious. School kids who would otherwise be running around, playing ball, or just hanging on the monkey bars, are now sitting down nose glued to their tiny screens. These kids will be missing out on exercising, which is not only good for their health but is also linked to improved cognitive function, better memory and being able to concentrate better.
Unwanted exposure
Parents rely on the school’s staff to make sure their kids are safe when at school. This includes safety from exposure to X-rated materials, such as porn and excessive violence. But even with the best teachers’ supervision, children with smartphones and even children who do not have smartphones can be exposed to such material on someone else’s phone. Not to mention what they see watch on smartphones while on the school bus to and from school. It’s true that there are many parent-control apps that filter and manage kids’ usage of smartphones. But kids are smart and digital natives; they enjoy the challenge of coming up with new ways to bypass these measures. This can lead to an endless cat-and-mouse game of new measures and new workarounds.
The un-social network
For some children, screens are also used as a place of refuge. Kids, especially socially awkward ones, sometimes lack the social skills required to make or interact with friends. They may shy away from social interactions if they feel out of place. But face-to-face interaction is a critical life skill. When we interact with others, we are continuously processing wordless signals like facial expressions, tone of voice, and even the physical distance between us and them. Equipping children with smartphones may increase the chance they will choose the phone over socializing with other kids. This will make it harder for them in the long-term to face social situations as they grow up.
Students are constantly on their phones engaged in social and 9 out of 10 they are just playing and taking selfies. If a teacher allows students to use their phones for research; they usually end up back on social media. This generation is addicted. You see it everywhere. People can’t even work without checking their phones. Its sickening!
Students should not be allowed to be used in school because they could be taking photos of other students without their permission. They might have taken an embarrassing photo of another student without them knowing and could post it on social media or use the photo to threaten the student to do stuff they might not want to do.
We are paying $600 billion for a students education… They need to respect that and stay focused… If they leave school without having had learned a thing, they have wasted all that effort put into their education… When they go to school, learning should be it. You do not need to be playing Angry Birds on your smart phone or texting your ‘bff.’ If you need some high class technology for your lesson, the school will provide it for you.
More and more studies are coming up highlighting how damaging phones are to the brains of children. Even though, we live in a tech world in the 21st century, adults can manage the resulting effects of living in a virtual world, children do not. They also do know moderation and restriction, and they are suppose to be learning how interact and socialize with other children, teachers and more in normal setting . Schools already use computers in the classroom to aid learning. Phones are not needed and parents of today need to stop blocking the normal development that children had in previous generations.
Because if students bring cellphone so there should be an competition between them that who has the latest and hottest modal.It can also led to theft.If children’s want to convey any information so schools have computers so they can conveyed throughit.If we say that students should bring cell phone to that parents can call their children in an emergency but parents can also call on school or in school reception.
They are a big distraction from learning and education. They might help if there is an emergency but teachers and the office could have phones to reach families of the students. If it goes off in the middle of the class then the kids that are trying to learn will be distracted from the vibrate or sound of the phone if it is not turned off.
Most schools already have computers and tablets in there system. The students can simply email each other or actual face to face talking. They can write essays at school and study there too. But for the less fortunate schools, they can take a libertie and let student use their phones.
Theft may occur when students bring phones to school because the other students may get jealous so they might steal it. Because of that the school have to waste time finding who is the culprit and also it is a loss to those who lost their phone. So it is good not to waste time and just don`t bring phone to school.
Students can be addicted to the Internet and games . And of course, there are always some bad movies or films that will affect students a lot in very negative ways. If kids use phone too much, that will lead to many problems for them such as myopia ,autism, obesity …..And so on.
USA Today
“When we’re asking these 12 to 13 year olds to carry the phone and not be on them, we 100 percent know that’s not happening,” says Delaney Ruston, a physician and director of the documentary “Screenagers: Growing Up in the Digital Age.” “You can go into any classroom or ask any middle schooler, and they will tell you consistently how they and/or their friends are sneaking being on the phones during class times.”
The consequences? According to the “Away For The Day” initiative Ruston developed with the team behind “Screenagers” to try to institute policies requiring phones to be put away, 56 percent of middle schools allow students to carry phones on them all day, yet 82 percent of parents don’t want their kids using phones there.
The Away For The Day website cites various academic studies that point to potential negative outcomes of classroom phone use. In one such study, 75 percent of teachers reported that the attention spans of students have decreased. In another study, students regularly interrupted by text messages had test scores that were 10.6 percent lower.
Ruston believes that putting the phones away can improve a child’s emotional well-being in school and help with their focus in and out of the classroom.
And while she recognizes that a teacher might ask a kid to pull out a phone during a given lesson, “to do X, Y, Z … the reality is that many of these kids now on their personal device have gotten so many notifications that they’re actually not going to whatever the teacher is saying they should be doing, but instead sending and receiving messages or going onto their video games.”
“You’re already going to have those struggles with (school supplied) educational devices,” Ruston adds, “but it gets exponentially more challenging when it’s a personal device.”
Even if a device on a student’s desk is turned off, the worry is that it still becomes a distraction.
Ruston also dismisses the safety argument. She pointed to an NPR report in which security experts have said that letting a kid have a phone in the classroom during a lockdown makes them less safe, not more. When students should be quiet, for example, a ringing or vibrating phone might alert an assailant where kids are hiding. Parents trying to reach youngsters in an emergency might jam communications and interfere with first responders. And the kids might miss instructions from the authorities.
But Ruston concedes that “that’s not to say there’s not an emotional upside for a parent.”
Negative: We should allow smartphones in school
Interactive learning in classrooms
Many schools today don’t have the equipment needed to make technology accessible for their students. This is where smartphones as learning aides come into the picture. These everyday hand-held devices have more processing power than all of NASA’s computers when they landed a man on moon. So, instead of dealing with computers, the teacher can simply ask the class to scan a QR code, or enter a www address that will take students directly to interactive content for the subject they are currently studying. Digital education is just another way for students to learn about the world around them and for teachers to communicate with them – on various digital platforms, all accessible by smartphones.
Keeping in touch
Back in the day, for parents to contact their children at school, they would have to call the school secretary, dictate a note and have it passed to the teacher and then to the student. Such inefficient methods are no longer required; the ability to be immediately contactable allows students and parents increased flexibility and freedom in their after-school playdates, activities, and pick-up arrangements. Plus, given the record number of school shootings occurring across America, smartphones give both students and their parents an added feeling of comfort, knowing they can call and text and video each other at any moment in time.
That’ll teach you
Children are growing up in a world dominated by smartphones. Instead of keeping this significant societal change outside of school and trying to pretend it doesn’t exist, we are better off educating students in school about the benefits and risks of smartphone use (and overuse). This includes teaching children about digital and cyberbullying and its harmful effects and how to responsibly use various social media platforms that are accessible from their smartphones. Teachers can also encourage children to question information and sources they are exposed to from their smartphones, which is an especially important lesson in today’s age of “fake news.”
As long as it is not distracting to the student or other students then it should be allowed in school… What about during lunch when they want to take pictures with friends to capture there high school experience? What about to call there parents after school for a ride? So what i am trying to say is during class no but in school when they are not in class then sure let them have there phone…
They can be used for additional research, calculators when needed (but no cheating in tests) and reading digital books. Also contacting parents in emergencies. So I think they should be allowed in school – also a great source of entertainment at break / lunch times when children can get bored!
In school their is no need of mobile phones because students are under the supervision of teachers and guards if there is any emergency they can use school office phone. So can be mishap pen with them. If they use in classroom they are just wasting time and parents money…..
Smart phones are a valuable asset to us now days as in our modern world , it helps us to sharpen the knowledge and at time of emergency it would help us contact with our parents or others. Even it helps students to retain their health and not carry loads even after.
Allowing phones is wonderful idea and should be considered in schools everywhere. Of course it would be disrespectful to use them while teachers are speaking, so phones would only be allowed if the teacher the class to use them. Studies have that giving the students the privilege in using cellophane’s during school have improved there accede records in multiple ways. For instance https://www.remind.com/ is an app thousands of teachers around the U.S use to remind students about homework assignments, projects, tests, etc. Most students do not chose to do their homework intentionally, rather they forget about it and are not able to do it. Remind allows teachers to send a quick message to all of their students in order to remind the kids.
Cell phones have many purposes and they can help students complete their work and they can get apps to help them on lessons and help with future lessons in math. You can look up facts about anything for any subject, History, science. That is my view on smart phones in class.
We can use them in many ways. In society today, almost every middle school student goes home and plays on their smartphones. So excluding part of our daily life at home, from school, is not right at all. Plus we can use them in many ways. They come in handy.
Smart phones should be allowed in schools because it plays a vital role in society. If there is ever an emergency the kids need to be able to contact their parents immediately. If the school were to have a lockdown how would the kids contact their parents to come get them. When most people here smartphone the first thing that comes to mind is fancy gizmos and games. It would be better if the school provided a phone without any games, or fancy gizmos for emergencies. This is what I believe about smart phones.
When a child of today wants to know something, what do they do? They google it! Think of the incredible power, versatility of a device like the smartphone. You can research, make notes, everything. In fact, why no issue them free, without texting or calliing to avoid distraction, for free!
Smartphones can be distracting but they are a great way to communicate with others. In case of emergency, A smart phone could be used to communicate to possibly save someones life. They could also help people with research, Directions and expressing their opinion. That’s my view of smartphones in school.
Smart phones are a great tool for keeping days; assignments and daily tasks organized and in check. The issue of distraction arises when an individual is unable to keep self control and in consequence they will be the ones to fail their courses. The smart phone gives an individual the opportunity to have an individualized computer which can then be used as a tool rather than a distraction. It is the lack of self control which causes issue; which then brings the question is it the smartphone that is the issue; or the students using the tool?
Come pick them up if they are sick. Also, cell phones allow parents to keep track of their children’s whereabouts before, during, and after school. And, of course, there’s always the possibility of a student needing to contact a parent because of a dangerous situation. Thus, having a cell phone is like having a guardian angel. Students can also connect with friends, but not just because it’s a fun thing to do; my teacher asks us to text or email our friends when they are absent to let them know what’s going on in class and to inform them of any homework. When used responsibly, a cell phone can be an excellent
communication tool.
Cell phones – especially smart phones – are a fabulouslearning resource. Students can use tools such as the calculator, the map finder, and the calendar. I’ve used my cell phone in Math and Geography and to keep track of my homework. My science teacher lets us use our smart phones to do research when we are doing group work or working on a project. For example, when we were studying ecology we did research on local jobs having to do with protecting the environment. Plus there are lots of great learning websites – including essay-writing websites – we can use to supplement the learning in class. Cell phones are a quick and easy way to incorporate technology in the classroom.
Cell phones encourage the responsible use of technology. Students can learn when and how to use their cell phones to enhance their learning. They will become more independent in their work and more motivated to learn. Students like being allowed to make choices, and they understand consequences. If a student is texting when he/she should be paying attention to the teacher, the teacher should take the cell phone temporarily away. No big deal. Before a test, all cell phones should be placed on the teacher’s desk. Again, no big deal. By allowing the use of cell phones, students will feel like they are being treated like responsible young adults, and they will appreciate that. If
teachers are patient, understanding, and consistent, students will……
USA Today
“Have a plan, not a ban,” says Liz Kline, vice president for education at Common Sense Education in the San Francisco Bay Area, a group whose mission is to help kids thrive in a world of media and technology. “There are legitimate learning contexts for using devices in the classroom,” Kline says, whether students are making movies or studying photography.
Kline acknowledges that digital distraction is “totally real,” and she recognizes that setting up the classroom norms for when it’s appropriate to use a phone – and when it is not – is not a simple matter.
Lisa Highfill, an instructional technology coach at the Pleasanton Unified public and secondary school district in Pleasanton, California, believes letting students have phones helps them prepare for higher education and eventually the workplace. “How many people go to work each day and turn their phone in?” she asks. “To me, getting ready for career and college is learning how to avoid the distraction of your phone.”
Educators should have dialogs with students about when and why kids feel compelled to pick up their devices, she says. “Teach students how to refocus, how to take care of something that is really nagging at them and then move on and put it away … Self-monitoring is a lifelong skill that we have an opportunity to integrate into our lessons.”
Of course, there ought to be times when phones are put away or even collected by teachers, no questions asked, namely during test time. Indeed, some students use the devices to cheat.
Safety concerns are also often given as a reason to let kids have devices at school. When there’s an accident or tragic incident, the presence of phones lets parents get in touch with the kids, and the kids can get in touch with a parent.
“Phones are as much for peace of mind of parents as they are for kids,“ says New York City-based social media coach Sree Sreenivasan, a parent and co-founder of the Digimentors consulting firm.
But parents may also try to reach the youngsters under more routine circumstances.
“I ask kids all the time, who do you normally get texts from during school? Their friends, of course,” Highfill says. “But their mothers are texting them, and it’s actually very practical. ‘Don’t forget to talk to your math teacher’ or ‘don’t forget you have this appointment at the end of the day.’ ”
Kline adds another dimension to the let-kids-have-phones-in-school argument. In some lower-income areas where there’s concern surrounding the digital divide, the school might offer the kind of speedy internet access that is not available at home. “I think there is some nuance around this,” she says.
And then there’s this argument: Restrictions just might not work.
“I really believe that the more rules and restrictions you put on top down, the more kids will just work to try to work around those rules. And they’re good at it, the best hackers,” Highfill says.
When her IT department blocked Snapchat access at school, kids built their own server as a workaround. Highfill also knows of students who put their cellphone cases – but not the phones themselves – inside pocket charts to fool teachers.
If a time traveler from 1990 came to 2018, they’d most certainly ask: “What is everyone carrying around and staring at?” Smartphones, tablets, laptops — the world is so immersed in technology; it’s hard to believe that even 20 years ago things were extremely different.
As some of today’s teachers represent the last of the pre-digital-native generation, can we really expect modern learners to put away their iPhones to go totally old school? Should they have to? Or should educators adapt their practice to support tech-savvy learners?
While many applaud the banning of devices as a way to rebuild student attention spans and overall focus in the classroom, others believe banning technology is a mistake we can’t afford to make.
The device debate around the world
France is considering banning cell phones in schools because students are simply too distracted. Right now, French students cannot have phones in class but can choose to use them during breaks. The new ban, slated for next school year, would get rid of cell phones in schools completely.
Meanwhile, in some parts of Canada, Australia, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Romania, and Estonia, students are encouraged to bring their own devices to school for learning, while the acceptance of cell phones in class varies by local region. A ban on phones in Italian schools was lifted recently when the Education Minister, Valeria Fedeli, in an interview with La Republica, referred to cell phones as an “extraordinary tool to facilitate learning.”
In the U.S., states and cities make their own decisions about device usage. The New York City Department of Education famously overturned previous mayor Michael Bloomberg’s ban on phones after businesses popped up in the form of trucks parked outside schools, charging students to store their devices during the day — an enterprise that racked up over $4 million a year.
Is there any clear evidence one way or the other?
There is not a lot of agreement on what to do about devices in the classroom, and the research doesn’t yet provide clear answers either. A study out of the Centre for Economic Performance London School of Economics and Political Science found that test scores rose by over 6% after cell phones were banned in British high schools in Birmingham, London, Leicester, and Manchester. However, a study out of Singapore Management University determined that students whose devices were taken scored 17 percentage points lower on tests than those whose devices weren’t taken, a trend the researchers attribute to — get this — anxiety and an inability to focus caused by FOMO or Fear Of Missing Out.
Teaching responsible tech usage
Barring some kind of technological apocalypse, chances are we’re not going back to a world without technology. So to ban devices in a learning environment erases their value as learning tools and does not teach students how to be responsible device users.
Secretary general of the French teachers’ union, SGEN-CFDT, Alexis Torchet, told NBC, “The question is not about banning phones but teaching students how to use them in a sensible and reasoned manner. About 90% of students have what is basically a computer in their pockets that are often more operational than the school’s. The debate must be centered on technology education.” It’s the job of educators to usher digital native students into this new realm by teaching them social responsibility. We must teach students about cyberbullying, focus, etiquette, and safety. As young people enter a work world teeming with technology, to delete devices from their education can seem foolish.
Engaging a new generation
Many of today’s teachers didn’t grow up on social media, with cell phones, or even with the Internet. In the past 20 years, humanity has quickly evolved to integrate technology deeply into our lives, and education systems that largely operate just as they did at the turn of the 20th-century risk becoming obsolete if they don’t evolve as well.
Stephen diFilipo, a digital education consultant, told Ed Tech Magazine that devices represent independence and a connection to the modern world for youth — much like getting one’s first car. “To take that away from [students] during the class period is deconstructing their world. Now you’ve walled off your learning environment from the rest of their world.”
New modes of learning
Not shockingly, students want to use technology as part of their learning process. An Educause Learning Environment Preferences survey noted that students prefer using technology to learn and that 54% of students often use at least two devices simultaneously for school work. Enter any college classroom and you’re likely to view a sea of laptops, with students typing away taking notes. Never before have students been able to access information more quickly or more thoroughly. What used to take hours at a library, chasing down titles and skimming through encyclopedias now takes seconds.
And a new world of 21st-century skills has emerged. Learners can now Skype with experts, chat with primary sources, and watch video tutorials to understand just about anything. No longer is the classroom teacher the keeper and dispenser of all knowledge. Devices can help make learning more self-directed, inquiry-based, and much faster. The trick is for educators to adapt more engaging modes of teaching and learning, steering away from lecture-based teaching and into more hands-on, collaborative learning.
SAMR (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition) is a framework created by Dr. Ruben Puentedura (2006) to help teachers integrate technology into classroom learning in meaningful ways that go beyond merely substituting old tools for tech tools — like substituting a laptop for a notebook to take notes. The framework shows how students can amplify and complexify their skills acquisition via technology — like redefining the understanding of Shakespeare through an original film production.
While sweeping bans feel like an easy way to curb the issues associated with technology integration, they leave out and call out those who depend on technology to assist in their learning or day-to-day living. If students require devices for disabilities, they must, of course, be able to use them.
Banning technology for everyone except disabled students brings up issues of equity — singling out those who need devices. According to the American Bar Association, “Under the ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act), students do not have to disclose their disability to other students and when professors have a ‘no- laptops-unless’ policy, it forces the student to choose privacy over learning.”
Where do we go from here?
The National Center for Education Statistics says that we are trending away from device bans. Their survey reports that the number of public schools banning devices fell from nearly “91 percent in 2009 through 2010 to nearly 66 percent in 2015 through 2016.” The initial frenzy of device backlash may be waning, but if educators don’t shift their practices to truly integrate technology into the learning process in meaningful ways, we risk not preparing students for a new 21st-century world.
Leslie A. Wilson, the chief executive officer of the One-to-One Institute, a nonprofit that consults with schools on Ed Tech told Ed Week, “There’s nothing transformative about every kid having an iPad unless you’re able to reach higher-order teaching and learning. If schools take all this technology and use it as a textbook, or just have teachers show PowerPoint [presentations] or use drill-and-kill software, they might as well not even have it.” The focus now should be on training both pre-service and in-service teachers to integrate technology authentically and to develop policies and curriculum that teach students digital responsibility.
Educators can seek out in-service professional development programs to elevate their teaching through responsible, meaningful, and cutting-edge technology-integrated teaching and learning.
The next step is to search and read similiar discussion in Chinese.
BBC 2016: 大家談中國：「高中生帶手機被勸退」背後有何真問題？今年3月初，河北滄州市第一中學（下稱滄州一中）12名高中生因在校攜帶或使用手機陸續被勸退，引起熱議。隨著社會的飛速發展，手機早已從奢侈品變成生活必需品，絕大多數學生家長都有經濟能力為自己的孩子配備手機。高中生帶手機已經成為一個具有普遍性的社會問題，如何應對高中生帶手機問題，已經成為困擾大多數高中學校的一大「難題」。據筆者了解，在不少高中，都對高中生帶手機問題持禁止態度，一般情況下，如果高中生帶手機進校園，第一次被發現的話，就要面臨「停課回家反省7天」的嚴厲懲罰，假如該名高中生不思悔改，第二次帶手機進校園又被發現的話，基本上都要面臨被勸退的命運。該如何理性審視「高中生帶手機被勸退」問題？筆者認為，至少應該從以下「三個為什麼」和「一個怎麼辦」入手。首先，高中生為什麼要帶手機進校園？這是探尋解決「高中生帶手機」問題的起源。如前文所述，從經濟因素考量，目前絕大多數高中生的家庭都已經具備給孩子配置手機的條件。但是，這不能成為高中生帶手機進校園的原因。那麼，高中生帶手機進校園的目的是什麼呢？這才是問題的關鍵。不可否認，不少學生家長為了方便聯繫，及時掌握孩子的學習生活情況，對學校禁止學生帶手機的規定「陽奉陰違」，這也是可以理解的。但是，如果僅僅是為了滿足聯繫交流的需要的話，完全可以採取其它方式，比如校園公用電話亭等就可以很好地滿足這個需要。需要注意的是，高中生帶手機進校園，由於自身自製力差等原因，不排除使用手機上網娛樂，影響正常學習的情況，甚至還有可能引發盲目攀比等不好的現象。總之，從高中生為什麼要帶手機進校園的角度進行分析，無法得出高中生必須要帶手機進校園的結論。其次，高中學校為什麼禁止高中生帶手機進校園？有人會問，大學生帶手機不是很自由嗎？為何不讓高中生也帶手機？這就要分析一下大學生與高中生的區別了。誠然，大學生與高中生都是充滿活力的年輕人，但是，必須承認，無論是從年齡還是心理、自製力等各個因素進行比較的話，高中生與大學生都不能同日而語。況且，大學生帶手機進課堂已經引發了不少質疑，有的高校已經實行了大學生上課之前自覺上交手機的制度，那麼，對於面臨巨大的高考升學壓力的高中學校和高中生來說，為了全力以赴一心一意地投入到學習中去，不帶手機進校園幾乎毫無疑義。而且，如果對學生帶手機問題聽之任之的話，影響其他同學學習、干擾課堂秩序、引發管理混亂等惡果都會一一齣現！為了照顧大多數人的利益，絕大多數高中都對高中生帶手機問題持禁止態度。第三，高中學校為什麼要對帶手機進校園的學生處以「勸退」的嚴厲懲罰？「人非聖賢，孰能無過。」「懲前毖後，治病救人。」學校是教育人的專門機構，懲罰不是目的。事實上，嚴格地說，並不是所有高中都對帶手機的高中生處以「勸退」的。一般情況下，第一次發現的話，都要給一次改過自新的機會。關於「勸退」，目前在我國的九年義務教育學校，小學六年初中三年，除重大違紀情況外（如違反國家法律、危害民族利益等行為）是不允許勸退的。而高中三年，由於目前並不屬於國家義務教育規定範圍內，所以學校是有權利對學生進行勸退的，一般情況下，校方會根據學生一學期或一年的違紀情況對其進行適當處理，超過一定的底線會對學生進行勸退。勸退後，一般會被要求寫檢討書，在家進行反省，反省期間不允許返校。經過家長、班主任、組內主任、學校主任確定其確實已經進行深刻反省以後，可以考慮准許回校學習。其實，「勸退」也是學校的無奈之舉。「國有國法，家有家規。」「沒有規矩，不成方圓。」良好的紀律是學習能夠取得預期效果的保證。沒有家長會願意把孩子送到一個紀律不好的學校的。因此，學校都對紀律有嚴格要求，為嚴格學校管理，教育學生自覺履行教育法律法規規定的義務，規範學生處分程序，學校往往會根據《教育法》、《未成年人保護法》、《預防未成年人犯罪法》等法律、法規及學籍管理規定， 處分學生也要遵循依法、公正、教育從先、保護學生合法權益、非歧視、嚴格控制受處分人數的原則。事實上，學校對違反紀律的學校的處罰手段也是非常有限的，一般來說，對小學生的處分為包括警告、嚴重警告、記過；對初中學生的處分為包括警告、嚴重警告、記過、記大過；對普通高中學生的處分包括警告、嚴重警告、記過、留校察看、開除學籍等。一個不爭的事實是，當高中生在畢業之際，如果其在校期間曾經受過學校處分的話，一般情況下，這些處分可能都會自動取消。因此，從這個角度去理解的話，「勸退」也並非「洪水猛獸」，因為高中生帶手機被勸退的話，不至於面臨失學的危險，數量可觀的各類公辦、民辦高中都為其提供了足夠的挑選餘地。因此，在筆者看來，有些人為被勸退的帶手機的高中生而過分擔憂，其實是杞人憂天，大可不必。最後，對於高中生帶手機問題，該怎麼辦？對於高中生帶手機進校園，有沒有比勸退更好的處理辦法？其實，嚴格地說，「高中禁止學生帶手機」的說法是很不嚴謹的。其實，在現實生活中，很多高中學校的通常做法是，原則上不允許學生帶手機到校，但是，如果由於種種原因，高中生事實上還是把手機帶到了學校，在這種情況下，學校一般都會要求學生把手機交給班主任老師代為保管，在需要時再向班主任老師提出申請。這樣無形中加大了班主任老師的工作量，但是，在當前的現實語境中，應該不失為一條解決高中生帶手機問題的有效途徑。總而言之，對於當下引起廣泛關注和討論的「高中生帶手機被勸退」事件，我們應該全分析，理性思考，提出更多建設性的、可操作性較強的建議，共同努力促成此類問題的圓滿解決。如此，則善莫大焉！本文不代表BBC的立場和觀點。網友如要發表評論，請使用下表：（責編：董樂）
Having recently returned from Debate Asia, I want to share with you my thoughts on where I would like to take this. My DDs (13 & 16) and I had a wonderful time participating in Debate Asia at the B team level (16 & below basically). Here are links to my blog entry: highlights of first debate & team video. There were 32 teams across Asia but one team could not make it to Taiwan due to visa issue, I heard. Our team of urgently formed group of 5 debaters (who could make it to Debate Asia) had one win, one tie, and one loss. We did better than 14 teams out of 31 teams!
However, we got lucky this time. Our team debaters have a wide range of Chinese proficiency. Basically, only my DDs’ Chinese are proficient enough or close to proficient enough to be competitive for Debate Asia. Intellect is not the issue and a non-issue for our team, as most of the other team members are gifted students. One skipped a grade and takes above level classes still, so skipping two grades basically. Another was the president of the student government in a large middle school. Chinese proficiency is the issue. The coach and I did a lot of background work to get the team “ready”. We studied the scoring rules closely and place debaters at positions that maximize their strength. The scoring rule is in our favor this year, since the strength of the arguments weighs one third to one half of the score, this year.
We may not be so lucky next time.
Now that 2019 Debate Asia is over, I am thinking of how to get ready for 2020 Debate Asia. There are inherent difficulty in doing so at the local level due to insufficient talents, insufficient interest, insufficient coach, and insufficient means. It is expensive to fly to Asia for the debate. It is difficult to find enough teens who are proficient enough in Chinese and interested in debate. The parents need to involved and interested also. There are few Chinese debate coaches.
What is the solution? Chinese Mini Asia Debate teams at the local level and US Debate Asia team at the regional or national level.
First, I would like to paint the “grand” picture in my mind and my arguments (ha ha) for doing it this way. I am not a debate coach but I have learned quite a bit as a Chinese debate parents over the last few months.
.
What is team debate?
Team debate is a team event that advocates or rejects a position posed by the topic. The clash of ideas must be communicated in a manner persuasive to the judge. The debate should:
Display solid logic, lucid reasoning, and depth of analysis
Utilize evidence without being driven by it
Present a clash of ideas by countering/refuting arguments of the opposing team (rebuttal)
Communicate ideas with clarity, organization, eloquence, and professional decorum
.
Why teach Chinese team debate?
Chinese team debate is an excellent way to teach Chinese at the next level, complementary to the usual Chinese instruction & CLE, and encompass everything that is important for language development:
聽（理解）: Critical listening and comprehension skills in Chinese
說（表達）: Verbalize ideas and arguments with clarity in Chinese
讀（找資料）：Research materials in English & Chinese
寫（翻譯，整理）：Organizing and writing sound arguments in English and then translating them back to Chinese or doing it in Chinese in the first place
Having the opportunity to compete in Debate Asia makes the learning process real, fun, urgent, and also useful for college application (least important, I think, but this helps greatly! ). But other publicly verifiable debate competition format can work too.
.
Debate Asia Format
Group A (16-18) & Group B (14-16 but no age minimum, so 16 & under) with Group C (13 and under) in the work for 2020
Four debaters to a team at the minimum (many school teachers have close to a dozen students, with subteams for different topics)
.
Whom is Chinese team debate for?
Chinese team debate is intended for teens with Mandarin Chinese proficiency of third to fourth-grade level in China/Taiwan at the minimum, who can:
Communicate activities of daily living, at least semi-fluently
Read Chinese teen/tween short stories or novels fluently. Requiring phonetic assistance at times is acceptable.
Comfortable with read-aloud exercises
Write or type in Chinese or be willing to learn to type in Chinese
At this point, I would like to concentrate on 11-15 year olds who can go on to form Group B teams to compete in Debate Asia. The ages of our group B team was 12, 13, 14, 14, and 16 year olds.
.
Difficulty of teaching Chinese team debate with Debate Asia Format at the local level
May not have enough people for each group at the local level
May not have enough debaters in a group to form two opposing team at the local level
May not have a Chinese debate coach
.
Solution around Debate Asia format
Parent-driven Mini Debate Asia debate modeled after Public Forum debate (2 person team) at the local level that loosely mirrors the English counterpart
Local, regional, or national level competitions in the US with parent judges (as often in the case of the regular public forum debate competition, which is my understanding)
Formation of regional US or national US team for Debate Asia toward the end of the school year with regional or national coach acting as coach or advisor. The topics are released at the end of May and competition is held in Asia at the end of July. By that time, debaters ideally have been trained to be relatively independent in debate preparation with some parental assistance. Through teleconference and various social media tools, the team can prepare for the debate over the summer under advicement of a coach, gather for two weeks before Debate Asia for intensive training with the coach, and then fly to Asia for the actual Debate Asia competition.
.
Public Forum Debate (English)
Wikipedia: “Public forum debate (PF) is a type of current events debate for teams of two which is the most widespread form of high school debate in the U.S. Individuals give short (2-4 minute) speeches that are interspersed with 3 minute “crossfire” sections, questions and answers between opposed debaters. The winner is determined by a judge who also serves as a referee (timing sections, penalizing incivility, etc). The debate centers around advocating or rejecting a position, or “resolution”, which is a proposal of a potential solution to a current events issue. Public forum is designed to be accessible to the average citizen.”
A PF debate lasts 33 minutes and can be broken down into the following:
Team A: first speaker: opening speech: 4 minutes
Team B: first speaker: opening speech: 4 minutes
Crossfire (between first speakers): 3 minutes
Team A: second speaker: rebuttal speech: 4 minutes
Team B: second speaker: rebuttal speech: 4 minutes
Crossfire (between second speakers): 3 minutes
Team A: first speaker: summary: 2 minutes
Team B: first speaker: summary: 2 minutes
Grand crossfire (all speakers): 3 minutes
Team A: second speaker: final focus: 2 minutes
Team B: second speaker: final focus: 2 minutes
.
Proposed Mini Debate Asia format
Since Debate Asia and Public Forum have different formats, I try reworking PF debate to have features of Debate Asia. I propose the following Mini Debate Asia format for a two person team with Team A (A1 & A2 speakers) and Team B (B1 & B2 speakers) in a debate:
Team A: Affirmative constructive 1正ㄧ申論: A1: 3.5 minutes
Team B: Negative short summary 反ㄧ小結： B1 short summary: 2 minutes
Team A: Affirmative short summary 正ㄧ小結：A1 short summary: 2 minutes
Crossfire (any speakers): 2 minutes each allotted to each side (4 minutes total)
Team B: Negative final focus 反ㄧ總結: B2: 2.5 minutes
Team A: Affirmative final focus 正ㄧ總結: A2 2.5 minutes
This works out to a grand total of 34 minutes for the whole debate, much shorter than Debate Asia with four person teams, with 13 minutes of constrictive and rebuttal speech, 8 minutes for four cross examinations, 4 minutes of short summaries, 4 minutes of cross fire, and 5 minutes of final focus. Each debater has on average 5.5 minutes of speech, 2 minutes of cross examination, and 1 minute of crossfire allotted or a total of 8.5 minutes.
Now, a speech of four minutes typically consists of 900 to 1,400 Chinese characters, depending on how fast you speak. My DD # 2 was the one doing the opening speech at Debate Asia. I gave her ~ 1,000-1,100 characters to read. You can check out the video again. So, a speech of 3.5 minutes should have around 800-1,200 Chinese characters.
Here is a sample lesson plan for Public Forum debate (I only skim through it…).
Basically, if a Chinese proficient adult of at least ILR level 4 can find four kids in the ~ 11 to 15 age group that fit the requirement, you can run your own local Chinese PF group with two competing teams with the opportunity to compete in Debate Asia. If you have six kids, then you can have three teams of two. Then, for every topic, you can have three-way debates for which each team needs to debate both sides of the topic. There are various ways to do this using technology but that’s the overall picture.
For me, Debate Asia and Chinese debate are the means to an end, but not the end. The goal is to take our children’s Chinese proficiency to the next level, in a comprehensive and fun manner. So, finer debate skills that require the expertise of a coach are the icing on the cake. The meat of this whole exercise is to develop skill in independent research, critical thinking, structuring, and delivery of arguments for a topic, in Chinese. And debate is just the method to make the process fun and pertinent.
.
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
We can break down the whole process to piecemeal standard operating procedure and let our children tackle each part separately. The following is one way to do it.
Here are a few actual Debate Asia topics for 2019. All but topic #3 are for group A (16-18) debate. (From what I gather, US debate topics are policy driven. However, there are many policy topics that are sensitive to the government and country to which many Debate Asia participants belong. So, those would NOT show up as potential debate topics in Debate Asia. So, some topics may be more value judgement / driven and harder to pinpoint.)
強制疫苗接種法案利大於弊(正)/弊大於利(反)
最低工資保障對勞工權益利大於弊(正)/弊大於利(反).
遏止全球暖化更需要國際立法(正)/民眾覺醒(反)
推廣基改作物是人類的福音(正)/災難(反)
I randomly take topic #1 on the relative degree of benefit vs. detriment of mandatory vaccine requirement (benefit > detriment or detriment > benefit). I strongly encourage the debaters to learn how to debate both sides for any topic. Parents or an adult proficient in Chinese help each child according to his or her need.
Go to a website such as https://vaccines.procon.org/ where you can readily see the pros and cons for each side of the arguments, at least on the major points. This removes the burden of independent research at this stage.
Search the website for topic discussion in Chinese and English. For example, Wikipedia. Watch online videos on such topic discussion in English and Chinese.
Copy & paste the arguments onto word processor and start working on how you want to phrase your own arguments. If you do this step first in English, then translate it to Chinese at the end.
Read aloud your own arguments, refine them, and keep practicing.
Do the same thing for both sides of the debate.
Get your two teams to start practice debating.
I can come up with a topic that each team works on for, say, two months at a time, under advisement of our coach. Then, teams can compete locally, regionally, or nationally depending on interest level. We can even use video conference to compete.
Part of the exercise is to be able to verbalize one’s argument, understand what the opponent is saying, and respond to the opponent’s argument. A winning argument needs a debate team proficient in Chinese to win. For example, my team wins the debate on the pro side. The other team can use my arguments against me, but if they are not as proficient in Chinese and can not deliver the messages effectively, they can still loose.
.
Graduated steps in preparation for Asia Debate
Utilizing debate topics that have been worked out for public form already, with arguments and scripts already laid out and available online. This takes out the research part and the debaters just need to read up on the topics in English and Chinese, copy & paste, rework it to his/her liking, and translating them to Chinese. Both sides already know each side’s arguments but, to win the debate, a team needs to be able to deliver it effectively. To kick start the process, we can act as Debate Central and provides basic Affirmative and Negative constructive speech. The rebuttal speech, short summary, and final focus will all draw from the the constructive speech and any rebuttal each side presents.
Use debate topics which warrant new research
Debate Asia topics comes out late May and this is when one does more intensive training with the coach, online initially and then in person, say, two weeks before the competition.
教練寫：”有些基本假設條件適用於臺中一中說研社 , 但不適合訓練美國隊，因地制宜要即時，擁抱改變。” 基本上，ABC/T 中文…程度有限，需花大量時間調整教學，辯論最重要的能力是聽力，研究research, 整理，理解，最後才是表達，但是語文不好會影響全部的能力。所以，教練要花大量時間做準備和寫稿，稿也需要依學生語文程度簡化，很花時間，暑假集訓時多則ㄧ周25小時左右。選手訓練也要花極大時間，尤其是中文普通的選手，若是被父母強迫來參加，配合度低，效果又大打折扣。教練沒收費，比賽費用全部自費，還請辯論界友人來助陣，是我們的貴人，實是可遇不可求。（我帶領家長團回饋教練。）我也以多年教小孩中文的經驗，幫忙教練調整教學，提供場地和設備，也多日廢寢忘食，親自操刀，幫助這群學生。因中文程度差對手多多，美國團隊大多由論點票得分，而這就多虧教練整理出的整體論點研究和架構。總而言之，平常不會有人拿石頭咂自己的腳，找個Mission Impossible 來做…… But we did it!!
It was an incredible journey for the Southeast US Atlanta Team. Our team members have various Chinese proficiency levels. Truly, one’s language proficiency (or lack of) affects the ability to listen, comprehend, organize, and express various parts of the debate. Shawn Yen, our excellent and most devoted coach, was able to utilize the best qualities of each debater and put each in the best line-up position. The team went through so much in the last few months and we are ecstatic over their accomplishment (one win, one tie, one loss). In addition, my DD#1 was voted as the Best Debater for our second debate and our second chair debater was voted as the Best Debater for the first debate. Go Team USA!
So the Chinese debate class is moving along, now to the meat of proper debate rules.
Asia Debate will announce the debate topics toward the end of May. Our team will get to know their assigned topics then. At the mean time, the coach gave reading-aloud assignment from United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals to build up their Chinese vocabulary and familiarize themselves with UN topics. The website has simplified Chinese version, which I then copied and converted to traditional Chinese for my girls. For their initial readings, I changed the font to one with zhuyin to make it easier for them, though alternative pronunciation would not be accounted for. I sometimes find the translation less than optimal.
Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.目標4：確保包容和公平的優質教育，讓全民終身享有學習機會
Obtaining a quality education is the foundation to creating sustainable development. In addition to improving quality of life, access to inclusive education can help equip locals with the tools required to develop innovative solutions to the world’s greatest problems.
Over 265 million children are currently out of school and 22% of them are of primary school age. Additionally, even the children who are attending schools are lacking basic skills in reading and math. In the past decade, major progress has been made towards increasing access to education at all levels and increasing enrollment rates in schools particularly for women and girls. Basic literacy skills have improved tremendously, yet bolder efforts are needed to make even greater strides for achieving universal education goals. For example, the world has achieved equality in primary education between girls and boys, but few countries have achieved that target at all levels of education.
The reasons for lack of quality education are due to lack of adequately trained teachers, poor conditions of schools and equity issues related to opportunities provided to rural children. For quality education to be provided to the children of impoverished families, investment is needed in educational scholarships, teacher training workshops, school building and improvement of water and electricity access to schools.
Enrollment in primary education in developing countries has reached 91 per cent but 57 million primary age children remain out of school.發展中國家的初等教育入學率達到了91%，但仍有5700萬兒童失學。
More than half of children that have not enrolled in school live in sub-Saharan Africa.未入學的兒童中，超過半數生活在撒哈拉以南非洲。
An estimated 50 per cent of out-of-school children of primary school age live in conflict-affected areas.據估計，50%的小學適齡失學兒童生活在受衝突影響的地區。
617 million youth worldwide lack basic mathematics and literacy skills.全球有6.17億名青少年缺乏基本的數學和識字技能。
Goal 4 targets 目標4的具體目標
4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and Goal-4 effective learning outcomes.到2030年，確保所有男女童完成免費、公平和優質的中小學教育，並取得相關和有效的學習成果。
4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and preprimary education so that they are ready for primary education.到2030年，確保所有男女童獲得優質幼兒發展、看護和學前教育，為他們接受初級教育做好準備。
4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university.到2030年，確保所有男女平等獲得負擔得起的優質技術、職業和高等教育，包括大學教育。
4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship.到2030年，大幅增加掌握就業、體面工作和創業所需相關技能，包括技術性和職業性技能的青年和成年人數。
4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations.到2030年，消除教育中的性別差距，確保殘疾人、土著居民和處境脆弱兒童等弱勢群體平等獲得各級教育和職業培訓。
4.6 By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, both men and women, achieve literacy and numeracy.到2030年，確保所有青年和大部分成年男女具有識字和計算能力。
4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.到2030年，確保所有進行學習的人都掌握可持續發展所需的知識和技能，具體做法包括開展可持續發展、可持續生活方式、人權和性別平等方面的教育、弘揚和平和非暴力文化、提升全球公民意識，以及肯定文化多樣性和文化對可持續發展的貢獻。
4.A Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, nonviolent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.建立和改善兼顧兒童、殘疾和性別平等的教育設施，為所有人提供安全、非暴力、包容和有效的學習環境。
4.B By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships available to developing countries, in particular least developed countries, small island developing States and African countries, for enrolment in higher education, including vocational training and information and communications technology, technical, engineering and scientific programmes, in developed countries and other developing countries.到2020年，在全球範圍內大幅增加發達國家和部分發展中國家為發展中國家，特別是最不發達國家、小島嶼發展中國家和非洲國家提供的高等教育獎學金數量，包括職業培訓和信息通信技術、技術、工程、科學項目的獎學金。
4.C By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing states.到2030年，大幅增加合格教師人數，具體做法包括在發展中國家，特別是最不發達國家和小島嶼發展中國家開展師資培訓方面的國際合作。
DD#2, “Georgia”, almost 13 now, is finishing up reading aloud to fluency the first semester Chinese Language Art (CLA) textbook from Taiwan. My original plan was to move onto six grade second semester textbook, which would be the natural progression. But, now that she recently joined the newly organized Chinese debate team, I am changing our plan.
Debate Asia, the organization that runs the Chinese debate competition, frequently uses as debate topics subjects that are of concern to the United Nation. There are, therefore, much use of social studies terminology and language, in Chinese of course. Regular CLA textbooks would not be efficient in providing such subject languages exposure.
The following two pictures are from a 7th grade second semester CLA textbook that I prepared for my DDs before.
Compare the above with the following images from an 8th grade second semester social studies textbook.
As you can clearly see, the social studies textbook provides excellent and efficient exposure to relevant Chinese terminology and language. It is also fitting that these materials overlap with Georgia’s English based social studies course material at school, which makes learning via scaffold reading experience (SRE) possible.
Yes, it is more boring to read these social studies textbook aloud, but I hope she can appreciate the language knowledge soon, when her debate competition gets closer and closer. We will see how it goes!
(There are videos online which go over much of materials presented in the textbook, but some narrators kind of just read the slide content off the screen, which is boring. Their pronunciation could be “better” also.)
