Πειστικός λόγος: πείθοντας τους μαθητές να γράψουν έναν λόγο πειθούς

Sometimes students need a little push to activate their imaginations. The collection of prompts below asks young writers to think through real or imagined events, their emotions, and a few wacky scenarios. Try out the ones you think will resonate most with your students. 

 http://www.lifehack.org/articles/communication/the-golden-rules-persuasive-essay-writing.html


http://www.ereadingworksheets.com/writing/persuasive-essay-topics/

Writing the persuasive essay from Antonis Stergiou

50 writing prompts_all_grade_levels from Antonis Stergiou

Η εκπαίδευση στη μεγάλη οθόνη: Η απαγορευμένη εκπαίδευση

Η εκπαίδευση στη μεγάλη οθόνη

η εκπαίδευση στην μεγάλη οθόνη from Antonis Stergiou

Δυσλεξία: μήπως όλοι μας πρέπει να είμαστε ενήμεροι;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEpBujdee8M&feature=youtu.be

Edutopia: ένας καθόλου ουτοπικός δικτυακός τόπος για την εκπαίδευση

https://www.edutopia.org/

Δάσκαλος: μια λέξη που τείνει να εξαφανιστεί από το αγγλικό εκπαιδευτικό σύστημα... και όχι μόνο.

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5981063455377273343#editor/target=post;postID=7417921768091802977

As it currently stands from Antonis Stergiou

Διδασκαλία μαθήματος των Θρησκευτικών: μια πρόταση από τη γηραιά Αλβιώνα

http://theconversation.com/teach-children-about-humanism-but-not-as-a-key-part-of-religious-studies-gcse-50556

Three parents are suing the government for failing in its “duty of neutrality and impartiality” in relation to religions and beliefs. The case, heard by the High Court on November 10, cites the European Convention on Human Rights, and the judgement is expected in the next few weeks.

The case, supported by the British Humanist Association (BHA), relates to a document setting out the content of the Religious Studies GCSE published in February 2015, which will be taught in schools for the first time in September 2016.

The parents, and through them the BHA, are challenging the priority given to religious views over non-religious views in the content of course. There is a circularity about their argument which is symptomatic of a wider confusion about the aims and character of religious education.

Not one of six key religions

Some have argued that religious education has lost much of its religious content and meaning in attempts to tailor itself to a variety of agenda – educational, social and political. In secondary school religious education, there has been a trend towards the displacement of the study of religions by ethical, philosophical and societal questions.

At a time when religion is increasingly prominent in public consciousness and policy, it appears our education system has taken away the structures and networks of religious understanding from religious education, just as we need them to find our way around. Sociologist of religion, Grace Davie, has repeatedly commented on the fact that just as religion has re-entered the public sphere and demands a response, we are losing the knowledge and language to debate it.

Τhe course document published in February aims to address this with a return to more systematic learning about religion. It requires in-depth study of two faiths with (a minimum) of 25% curriculum time spent on each. Students can choose two out of six faiths, with Humanism excluded. Annexes at the end of the document set out the desired content for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism under the headings: beliefs and teachings, practices, sources of wisdom and authority, forms of expression and ways of life.

The other 50% of curriculum time is to be used either for “textual approaches” or “the approach of religious, philosophical and ethical studies in the modern world”, or a combination of the two. The BHA submitted its own annex in the hope that Humanism would join the “big six” religions as another option.

Don’t do Humanism an injustice

The Department of Education’s decision not to include this annex is the basis of the grievance; but is nevertheless a wise one. The annexes are designed to serve the in-depth studies of religion. To give schools the option to choose Christianity and Humanism and no non-Christian religious tradition for in-depth study would leave a serious gap in young people’s learning in this globalised age and religiously plural society.

To try to fit Humanism into the same pattern of study as the religions is to do it an injustice.

Reading the proposed annex shows how Humanism is distorted by squeezing it into the framework of the four themes. By the BHA’s own admission, non-religious people are not compelled by their beliefs to engage in any sort of formal practice or observance.

Under the heading “sources of wisdom and authority”, the annex claims that there are no “sacred” texts and calls for the critical examination of all texts and traditions. This suggests a lack of material for the kind of study the religious studies subject content requires. This is to be expected because, as the annex states, Humanism’s method for discovering truth is reason, evidence, and scientific investigation.

Other, more natural homes

Those keen to promote religious education and its relevance sometimes forget it is just one part of the whole school curriculum. Taken together, the subjects of the curriculum introduce students to different ways of knowing, different approaches to truth – aesthetic, mathematical, scientific, religious. These are not necessarily contradictory, however humanists reject the religious and rely above all on the scientific.

Religious studies is not a natural home for Humanist ideas of method and meaning, but they are well served by the priority given to science in schools. The BHA have been keen to guard the purity of the scientific method by campaigning against reference to non-scientific ideas such as belief in divine creation or intelligent design within the subject. They have not shown the same concern about the purity of religious method in Religious Studies.

Yet I am not convinced of the need to eliminate from any discipline all reference to that which it is not. In the same way, to have some awareness of non-religious positions and arguments might help to clarify what constitutes “the religious” in the subject religious studies.

I am glad that, although Humanism is not an option for detailed study, the new GCSE subject content does require that students develop “knowledge and understanding of religions and non-religious beliefs, such as atheism and humanism”. It gives some guidance on how this might be included within the approach of religious, philosophical and ethical studies in the modern world. For example, it suggests that students learn: “how those with religious and non-religious beliefs respond to critiques of their beliefs”. I cannot predict what the judgement on the legal challenge will be, but as an educationalist I think this provision is enough.

Ο μύθος του μοναδικά... καλύτερου εκπαιδευτικού συστήματος

http://theconversation.com/how-genetics-could-help-future-learners-unlock-hidden-potential-68254

Salman Rushdie recently caused controversy by bemoaning the lack of “rote learning” in schools. He spoke about the benefits of learning poetry by heart – a method many see as archaic and outdated in today’s classroom.

Despite the criticisms of Rushdie’s comments, the debate around the effectiveness of different learning styles in modern education is as active as ever – with many recognising that each pupil prefers a different learning style and technique.

This can of course make it hard for teachers to gear classes up for each individual’s preferred style of learning. Especially given that one style, such as social learning, can appear to be the exact opposite of another style, such as those who prefer a more solitary style of education.

Research shows that when it comes to learning style preferences or even A-level choice, they are pretty hard wired in each individual – with genes playing a large part in the process. And we know that genes can also shape our relationships with other people – whether they be parents, teachers or peers.

Why genes matter

“Educational genomics” is a relatively new field, which has been expanding rapidly in the recent years because of advances in technology. It involves using detailed information about the human genome – DNA variants – to identify their contribution to particular traits that are related to education.

And it is thought that one day, educational genomics could enable educational organisations to create tailor-made curriculum programmes based on a pupil’s DNA profile.

A number of recent large-scale genetic studies on education-related traits – such as memory, reaction time, learning ability and academic achievement – have identified genetic variants that contribute to these traits. And studies using even more advanced technologies are also currently underway, promising to add to our growing knowledge of what helps us to learn.

This information could then be used to find out what DNA variants contribute to reading and mathematical ability, or school achievement. And then used to predict whether or not a pupil is likely to be gifted in a particular field such as music or mathematics, for example. These “traits” could then be nurtured in the classroom.

A personalised approach

But despite all the existing evidence for individual differences in learning, genetics is rarely a consideration when it comes to education. Though, recent years have seen a rise in funding and research into personalised medicine. This involves “mapping” genetic differences among people to predict and target potential health issues in later life, which has allowed doctors to adjust treatment and prevention approaches to try and stave off risks before they even begin to develop.

So it wouldn’t be a great leap to use these same databases – and research funding – to advance the field of educational genomics. Meaning that every child in the future could be given the opportunity to achieve their maximum potential.

But it is also important to bear in mind that our genes do not work in isolation. The human genome is a dynamic system that reacts to the environment. And the role of the environment in education is just as important to the development of a child.

For example, musical talent can be inherited, but can only be developed as a skill in the presence of specific environmental conditions – such as the availability of musical instrument and hard practice.

And educational genomics aims to uncover this complex relationship – to look at how the genome works in different environments. This information will then help researchers to understand how this interplay affects brain and behaviour across the life of a person.

By considering DNA differences among people in the future, educational genomics could provide the basis for a more personalised approach to education. This would most likely be a much more effective way of educating pupils because educational genomics could enable schools to accommodate a variety of different learning styles – both well-worn and modern – suited to the individual needs of the learner.

And in time, this could help society to take a decisive step towards the creation of an education system that plays on the advantages of genetic background. Rather than the current system, that penalises those individuals who do not fit the educational mould.

Η χαμένη αθωότητα (;) των παραμυθιών

Oι Γκριμ, οι Γερμανοί και τα δικά μας παραμύθια


Αδερφοί Γκριμ- Όχι και τόσο παραμυθένια υπόθεση

το αλλο προσωπο της κοκκινοσκουφιτσας from Antonis Stergiou

Δημιουργική γραφή: στόχος οι επικοινωνιακές δεξιότητες και όχι οι... συγγραφικές.

http://theconversation.com/why-the-teaching-of-creative-writing-matters-67659

For the last 30 years or so the rise of creative writing programmes in universities has been met with seemingly unending howls of derision from all quarters. Hanif Kureishi, novelist, screenwriter – and professor of creative writing at Kingston University – described them as a “waste of time”. But universities around the world beg to differ, as the increasing number of courses and students testify.

The recent Sunday Times league tables for universities ranked the quality of teaching in creative writing at The University of Bolton as the best in the country. The programme there also boasts the highest ranking in terms of student experience.

Given that I am the only full-time lecturer in creative writing at Bolton – and also led the programme for two of the three years the recent figures cover – I should be able easily to explain our success, and why our students rate our teaching so highly. I say “should”, because I’m not sure of the answer.

There are easy ways to get students to rate teaching highly. We can tailor the classes to their personal needs and wants, and give them all high marks. Or we can teach them at a lower level than we should so that they feel a greater sense of achievement. But at Bolton we do none of these. So what’s the secret?

The measure of a mark

How you actually go about judging the quality of teaching – particularly with a subject like creative writing – is tricky. There are the normal ways that universities use: peer-assessment, student feedback, the evaluation of staff by professionals who specialise in methods of teaching and learning and staff development programmes. And as Bolton is a teaching intensive, research informed university we do a lot of these things, and I think we do them very well.

Hanif Kureishi, who says creative writing courses are ‘a waste of time’. andersphoto/Shutterstock.com

But I wonder whether what is being measured or evaluated in these assessments is more the style of the teacher, rather than the content. Most assessors are experts in teaching methods and practices – and it’s unreasonable to expect them to have detailed knowledge of every subject.

As non-specialists they are able to measure the levels of student engagement, of academic challenge, of whether the “learning outcomes” which plague university teaching in creative writing are being met. And if you measure it this way, then it’s quite possible that detractors such as Kureishi are right.

A place for play

Except that the teaching of creative writing, when done well, is about more than the skills and craft and technique, important as these things are. And as the writer and lecturer Liam Murray Bell describes, writers must find and use a consistency of tone, style and voice.

It’s also about encouraging students to play, to move beyond their normal styles and subjects of writing, beyond their use of traditional structural, narrative and poetic forms – and to ask them to see what happens. In this sense university is a place for play. Teacher and game designer Eric Zimmerman has defined play as:

The free space of movement within a more rigid structure. Play exists both because of and also despite the more rigid structures of a system.

If students are not actively encouraged to play then we are simply encouraging them to remain as static as they were when they entered higher education – even if they are more adept at using “writerly” skills and techniques.

The secret of success

To me it seems there is no “secret” to good teaching. You do the basics, and you do them as well as you possibly can. You limit class numbers. You give student-writers the individual attention they crave. You make sure that your teachers are good writers and that your writers are good teachers, so that expertise can be shared effectively.

And you make students read widely. They should read the classics, I suppose, but they should also read the “non-classics” – what many academics see as trash fiction. And they should read their peers and contemporaries too.

Read far and wide to become a better writer. Pexels

Importantly, they should read things such as advertising billboards and street signs, the shapes of buildings, the colour of the pavement, the weather, the look in people’s faces. Writers need to breathe in so that they can breathe out their own individual reactions and responses. At Bolton we spend time reading and breathing, and that helps students find voices and interactions which can blend with the craft of writing to produce work which means something to them.

Very few students will earn a living as a writer. But writing is about more than that, and the ability to communicate effectively is a rare and precious thing. Good teaching should not be measured in the texts which students produce, then, but in the knowledge gained through the actions of writing – knowledge which lasts forever.

In the end, if students enjoy their studies, and believe that they’re gaining skills which are transferable in the workplace and will last them well beyond university, then perhaps that is what they see as ‘good teaching’. And perhaps too they’re the best ones to judge.

Βία: ας μάθουμε πώς να αλλάξουμε την ιστορία...

Tα παιδιά δεν μαθαίνουν από ανθρώπους που δεν συμπαθούν!

Rita pierson from Antonis Stergiou

Ο κινηματογράφος στην εκπαίδευση

Using films in the classroom from https://www.slideshare.net/sterantonius" target="_blank">Antonis Stergiou

Δημιουργική Γραφή

δημιουργική γραφή from Antonis Stergiou

Mέθοδος CLIL

Mέθοδος clil from Antonis Stergiou

Θανατική ποινή: Σωστό ή Λάθος

Ένας διάλογος πάνω στο αμφιλεγόμενο αυτό ζήτημα. Το άρθρο εστιάζει στους τρεις σκοπούς της επιβολής της ποινής:
- εκδίκηση (backward - looking view)
- παραδειγματισμός  &  σωφρονισμός (forward- looking view)
https://theconversation.com/death-penalty-is-capital-punishment-morally-justified-42970

The execution, by hanging, of Yakub Memon for his part in the 2003 Mumbai bombings invites us to revisit the vexed issue of capital punishment. Few topics incite such moral passion and controversy.

The world’s religious communities are divided on the death penalty. Despite a seemingly unambiguous commitment to non-violence (or “Ahimsa”) in both Hinduism and Buddhism, scholars within those traditions continue to debate the permissibility of lethal punishment. The Old Testament enjoins us to take an “eye for an eye” – the principle of lex talionis – while the New Testament exhorts us to “turn the other cheek”. And while Islam is generally regarded as compatible with the death penalty, the Qur'an’s emphasis on forgiveness suggests that Muslims should sometimes respond to evil with mercy, not retaliation.

While many European countries urge an ethic of rehabilitation in their criminal justice systems, many jurisdictions in the United States stand firmly in favour of capital punishment for serious crimes. Even a federal jury in Massachusetts, a liberal bastion, recently doled out the death penalty to the sole surviving perpetrator of the Boston marathon bombing. And while the United Kingdom abandoned the death penalty in 1964 – the year of the last executions – nearly half of the British public favours a reintroduction of it (though that figure has been dropping steadily).

We will not make progress in the public debate about the death penalty unless we realise that it is only one element in a much bigger controversy: about the point of punishment itself. As The Conversation invites us to rethink the death penalty over the next few weeks, we must not conduct this discussion in a vacuum. Before you ask yourself whether we should have the death penalty, consider: why hand out any punishments at all? Considering the three main families in the philosophy of punishment can help us organise our conversation.

Retribution

“Bad guys deserve to suffer.” This is a blunt slogan, but it captures the essence of a deeply familiar notion: people who have committed culpable wrongs deserve their lives to go worse as a result. Why do they deserve it? Perhaps because it’s not fair for the lives of wrongdoers to go well when the lives of the innocent have gone poorly – punishment levels the playing field. Whatever the reason, “retributivists” – those who believe in retribution – argue that the punishment of criminals is intrinsically valuable; it is valuable in and of itself, rather than valuable because of its good consequences (for example, preventing future crime).

Even if punishing murderers and thieves had no effect on reducing the overall crime rate, retributivists tend to think it’s still the right thing to do. Retributivists also think that the severity of punishment should match the severity of the crime. So, just as it is wrong to over-punish someone (executing someone for stealing a pair of shoes), it can be wrong to under-punish someone (giving him a community service order for murder).

If you are a retributivist, you might support the death penalty because you think that certain or all murderers (and perhaps other criminals) deserve to suffer death for their crimes. Depending on how you think about death, however, you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds that it is disproportionately harsh – perhaps you think that no matter what someone has done, she does not deserve to die for it.

On the other hand you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds that it is disproportionately light. Many people who opposed the recent death sentence for the Boston bomber did so on the grounds that life in a maximum-security prison would be a worse punishment – and so more fitting – than death.

Deterrence

“Criminals should be punished so that they and others will be less likely to commit crime in the future, making everybody safer.” Many people criticise retributivism on the grounds that it is nothing but a pointless quest for barbaric revenge.

Australia withdrew its ambassador to Indonesia after the execution, in April, of two of its nationals for drug trafficking.EPA/Dan Himbrechts

Inflicting suffering on human beings, if it is to be morally justified, must instead have a forward-looking purpose: protecting the innocent from harm. If this sounds sensible to you, you probably believe the point of punishment is not retribution, but rather deterrence.

The idea here is familiar enough: people face temptations to break just laws; the demands of morality and the demands of rational self-interest sometimes seem to diverge. Threats of punishment realign those demands by making it irrational for self-interested individuals to break the law.

If you are a defender of deterrence, you must answer two questions about capital punishment before determining where you stand. The first is empirical: a question about real-world facts. Does the threat of the death penalty actually deter people from committing heinous crimes to a greater extent than the threat of life imprisonment?

The second question is moral. Even if the death penalty deterred crime more successfully than life imprisonment, that doesn’t necessarily mean it would be justified. After all, imagine if we threatened execution for all crimes, including minor traffic violations, theft, and tax fraud.

Doing so would surely slash the crime rate, yet most people would judge it to be wrong. Deterrence theorists tend to defend some upper limit on the harshness of punishment – and it may be that death simply goes beyond what the government is ever permitted to threaten.

Reform

“Punishment communicates to criminals that what they have done is wrong, and gives them an opportunity to apologise and reform.” There are many different variants of this view: educative, communicative, rehabilitative – and there are important differences between them. But the basic idea is that punishment should make the wrongdoer understand what he or she has done wrong and inspire her to repent and reform.

Whatever version of this view one supports, its implication for the death penalty is reasonably clear. What is the point of a criminal reforming herself as she prepares for the execution chamber?

To be sure, many people try to mix and match different elements of these three broad views, though such mixed theories tend to be unhelpfully ad hoc and can offer conflicting guidance. Far better, to my mind, to plant one’s flag clearly and answer the question: which view should have priority in our thinking about punishment?

Then, and only then, can we proceed to think about the justice (or lack thereof) of governments who kill their citizens.

Volunteerism or Voluntourism? δυο γράμματα που διαφοροποιούν τόσο πολύ μια έννοια

                                Volunteerism     vs     Voluntourism

https://theconversation.com/think-looking-after-turtles-in-costa-rica-for-three-weeks-is-good-for-your-cv-think-again-66148

Every year, an estimated 1.6m people across the world choose to volunteer overseas. The majority of these individuals are under the age of 25 – they have often just left school, or are taking a year off between studies.

While helping to alleviate poverty appears to be of key importance to all volunteers, many are also motivated by the opportunity to bolster a CVor personal statement. In the eyes of recruiters – particularly universities – candidates who have volunteered internationally are considered a step ahead. They are seen to possess a greater awareness of global issues and different cultures, and a desire to contribute to society.

Yet there is a huge variety of opportunities in international volunteering, and it is important to recognise the difference between shallow and deep volunteering. So-called “deep volunteers” may embark on a six-month trip, contributing to a long-term project in poor living conditions with no communication to the outside world, or travel as a medical volunteerat great personal risk – for example, to care for Ebola victims in Western Africa.

At the other end of the spectrum there are “shallow volunteers” – those who spend £625 of their own money for a one-week project with elephants in Thailand, or £420 to protect marine wildlife on the beaches of Costa Rica. These options are attractive to volunteers seeking a fun experience in exotic locations, without a long-term commitment to a specific project.

[...]

Yet there is a growing recognition that shallow volunteering can do more harm than good. Author and philanthropist J K Rowling recently criticised the rise of “voluntourism”, because it enables individuals to “consume” poverty as an enriching experience that looks good on their CV, which can actually make problems worse for vulnerable children.

But recruiters and young people alike must realise that international volunteering is not a box to tick on a CV. Employers and universities should probe individuals on what sort of volunteering they conducted and how they think the experience makes them better candidates.

[...]

To improve the quality of international volunteering, recruiters of young graduates must only give merit to valuable volunteer work. Likewise, volunteers who wish to prove their worth must have a commitment to a project, be responsible, and have respect and appreciation for the cultural environment in which they are immersed.

Μάθημα... μέσων κοινωνικής δικτύωσης: υποχρεωτικό ή επιλογής;

https://theconversation.com/uk/education

0" />

1477583020.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
[...]

Given all of this, it is my belief that social media education should be treated with the same level of importance as sex education. And as adults, educators, and employers, we need to take some responsibility in educating our children on the “birds and the bees” of social media use – because it has the potential to do serious damage to young people’s future’s and prospects.

Children today engage with social media at a young age, so the responsible use of it needs to be built into the curriculum at primary school level. As children progress through their education – what they are taught can evolve.

This means that from being made aware of issues such as their personal security and safety, they can move on to learning about how they could find themselves on the wrong side of the criminal and civil law for what they post or tweet. And how their online profiles can influence their job prospects – both negatively and positively.

Because in this modern age we live and work in today, this type of training could make a real difference to the futures of children and young people – both online and off.