Bridging British Education Virtual Academy 伦桥国际教育

1v1 English Lesson - Debate Preparation and Logical Fallacies 1v1 英语课程 - 辩论准备与逻辑谬误

1. Course Basic Information 1. 课程基本信息

Course Name: 1019 VJ DB B G3 课程名称： 1019 VJ DB B G3 课程

Topic: Debate Practice: National Parks & Introduction to Logical Fallacies (Correlation vs. Causation, Slippery Slope) 主题： 辩论练习：国家公园与逻辑谬误入门（相关性与因果性，滑坡谬误）

Date: Date not specified in transcript 日期： 日期未在文本中指明

Student: Cassie, Luna 学生： Cassie, Luna

Teaching Focus 教学重点

Practicing formal debate structure, recognizing and rebutting logical fallacies, and in-depth research integration.

练习正式辩论结构，识别和反驳逻辑谬误，以及深入整合研究资料。

Teaching Objectives 教学目标

Recap and practice the debate on 'More land should be dedicated as national parks.' 回顾并练习关于‘是否应将更多土地划为国家公园’的辩论。
Introduce and differentiate between correlation and causation. 介绍并区分相关性（correlation）和因果性（causation）。
Identify and practice rebutting common logical fallacies (e.g., Slippery Slope). 识别并练习反驳常见的逻辑谬误（例如，滑坡谬误）。

2. Course Content Overview 2. 课程内容概览

Main Teaching Activities and Time Allocation 主要教学活动和时间分配

Warm-up and Topic Confirmation: Reviewing student progress and confirming the debate topic: 'More land should be dedicated as national parks.'

热身与主题确认： 回顾学生进度并确认辩论主题：“是否应将更多土地划为国家公园”。

Review: Definition of National Park: Recap on what a National Park is (giant park, nature preservation).

复习：国家公园的定义： 复习国家公园的定义（巨大的公园，保护自然）。

Introduction to Logical Fallacies: Introduction to logical fallacies, focusing on Correlation vs. Causation with examples (trees/birds, litter/dead fish).

逻辑谬误介绍： 介绍逻辑谬误，重点讲解相关性与因果性的区别，并给出示例。

Fallacy Practice: Red Socks & Superstition: Analyzing the fallacy of equating superstition (wearing red socks) with exam success.

谬误练习：红袜子与迷信： 分析将迷信行为（穿红袜子）与考试成功等同起来的谬误。

Debate Prep & Fallacy Example: Violent Games: Discussion on banning violent computer games, analyzing an argument linking popular games to increased knife crime (Slippery Slope/Correlation).

辩论准备与谬误示例：暴力游戏： 讨论是否应禁止暴力电脑游戏，分析将游戏流行与青少年持刀犯罪率上升联系起来的论点（滑坡谬误/相关性）。

Debate Prep & Fallacy Example: Abolishing GCSEs: Analyzing the slippery slope argument that abolishing exams leads inevitably to increased crime.

辩论准备与谬误示例：废除GCSEs： 分析废除考试必然导致犯罪率上升的滑坡谬误论点。

Debate Round 1: National Parks (Cassie vs. Luna): Cassie (Affirmative) presents her arguments, followed by Luna (Negative) presenting hers, both utilizing research.

辩论第一轮：国家公园（Cassie vs. Luna）： Cassie（正方）陈述论点，随后Luna（反方）陈述论点，双方均运用了研究资料。

Debate Round 2: Rebuttal Practice: Cassie rebuts Luna's points; Luna attempts to rebut Cassie's rebuttal (focusing on structure and complexity).

辩论第二轮：反驳练习： Cassie反驳Luna的论点；Luna尝试反驳Cassie的反驳（重点关注结构和复杂性）。

Language Knowledge and Skills 语言知识与技能

Vocabulary:
Logical fallacy, rebut, correlation, causation, dedicate, extinction, ecosystem, CO2, literacy, numeracy, abolish, motivation, monotonous, repetitive, minority, engage, revision, spontaneous

词汇：
逻辑谬误，反驳，相关性，因果性，奉献/划拨，灭绝，生态系统，二氧化碳，读写能力，算术能力，废除，积极性，单调的，重复性的，少数群体，参与，复习，自发的

Concepts:
Correlation vs. Causation, Slippery Slope Fallacy, Debate Structure (Introduction, Main Body, Conclusion, Rebuttal)

概念：
相关性与因果性，滑坡谬误，辩论结构（引言、主体、结论、反驳）

Skills Practiced:
Formal debate speaking, rapid argumentation, synthesizing external research into oral presentations, complex rebuttal skills.

练习技能：
正式辩论口语表达，快速论证能力，将外部研究整合到口头陈述中，复杂反驳技巧。

Teaching Resources and Materials 教学资源与材料

Topic: More land should be dedicated as national parks. 主题：应将更多土地划为国家公园。
Visual aid for Scottish Wildcat breeding program. 关于苏格兰野猫繁殖计划的视觉材料。

3. Student Performance Assessment (Cassie, Luna) 3. 学生表现评估 (Cassie, Luna)

Participation and Activeness 参与度和积极性

Excellent engagement, especially during the complex rebuttal rounds. 参与度极佳，尤其是在复杂的反驳环节。
Both students actively utilized self-prepared research. 两位学生都积极运用了自己准备的研究资料。

Language Comprehension and Mastery 语言理解和掌握

High understanding of the difference between correlation and causation, although the complex rebuttals proved challenging. 对相关性和因果性的区别理解度高，尽管复杂的反驳环节具有挑战性。
Clear grasp of the core arguments for and against the motion. 清晰理解了该辩题双方的核心论点。

Language Output Ability 语言输出能力

Oral: 口语：

Cassie delivered a well-structured, research-heavy opening argument. Cassie 提出了结构良好、研究详实的开场论述。
Luna provided strong counter-arguments focusing on human welfare (homelessness) and animal welfare. Luna 提供了有力的反驳论点，重点关注人类福祉（无家可归者）和动物福利。

Written: 书面：

N/A (Focus was oral debate practice)

不适用（重点是口头辩论练习）

Student's Strengths 学生的优势

Strong ability to integrate complex research data persuasively (both students). 强大的能力，能有说服力地整合复杂的调查数据（两位学生）。
Cassie: Effective use of rhetorical questions and creating strong imagery ('Green hospital'). Cassie：有效运用反问句并创造了强烈的意象（‘绿色医院’）。
Luna: Clear and direct articulation of humanitarian/social counter-arguments. Luna：清晰、直接地阐述了人道主义/社会方面的反驳论点。

Areas for Improvement 需要改进的方面

Handling the structural complexity of subsequent rebuttals (Round 2, Round 3). 处理后续反驳的结构复杂性（第二轮、第三轮）。
Ensuring immediate, precise identification of the opponent's specific logical fallacy type. 确保能立即、准确地识别对手提出的具体逻辑谬误类型。

4. Teaching Reflection 4. 教学反思

Effectiveness of Teaching Methods 教学方法的有效性

Very effective in challenging students with multi-layered debate practice. 在多层次的辩论练习中，对学生极具挑战性且有效。
Successful introduction and contextualization of abstract logical concepts. 成功地介绍了抽象的逻辑概念并将其置于语境中。

Teaching Pace and Time Management 教学节奏和时间管理

The pace was fast, especially during the debate rounds, which is beneficial for high-level practice. 节奏很快，尤其是在辩论环节，这对高水平练习非常有益。
Teacher provided timely recaps and summaries between student speeches to maintain flow. 教师在学生发言间隙提供了及时的回顾和总结，以保持流程顺畅。

Classroom Interaction and Atmosphere 课堂互动和氛围

Highly engaged, competitive yet supportive, reflecting deep topic familiarity.

高度投入，既有竞争性又互相支持，反映出对主题的深入熟悉。

Achievement of Teaching Objectives 教学目标的达成

Debate structure practice was achieved through three full rounds. 通过三轮完整的辩论，实现了辩论结构练习的目标。
Fallacy introduction was well-integrated into the debate context. 逻辑谬误的介绍很好地融入了辩论的背景中。

5. Subsequent Teaching Suggestions 5. 后续教学建议

Teaching Strengths 教学优势

Identified Strengths: 识别的优势：

Seamless integration of complex logical theory into current debate material. 将复杂的逻辑理论无缝地融入到当前的辩论材料中。
Providing positive, detailed feedback on research application and rhetorical skills. 对研究应用和修辞技巧提供积极、详细的反馈。

Effective Methods: 有效方法：

Using the debate topic itself (National Parks) to illustrate correlation/causation and slippery slope. 利用辩论主题本身（国家公园）来说明相关性/因果性和滑坡谬误。
Structuring the practice so students rebut rebuttals, pushing critical thinking further. 构建练习结构，让学生反驳反驳，进一步推动批判性思维。

Positive Feedback: 正面反馈：

The teacher specifically acknowledged Cassie's persuasive imagery ('Green hospital'). 老师特别表扬了Cassie的修辞手法（如“绿色医院”）。
The teacher validated Luna's strong research points regarding homelessness statistics. 老师肯定了Luna在无家可归者统计数据方面提出的有力研究观点。

Next Teaching Focus 下一步教学重点

Begin debate practice on the new topic: 'This house believes we should eat less meat' (Luna Affirmative, Cassie Negative). 开始关于新主题的辩论练习：“本院认为我们应该少吃肉”（Luna正方，Cassie反方）。
Reinforce recognition of the 'Slippery Slope' fallacy. 巩固对“滑坡谬误”的识别。

Specific Suggestions for Student's Needs 针对学生需求的具体建议

Pronunciation & Reading: 发音与阅读：

Continue practicing smooth reading of prepared, dense research material, especially multi-syllabic vocabulary like 'monotonous' and 'repetitive'. 继续练习流利地朗读准备好的、密集的学术材料，特别是像‘monotonous’（单调的）和‘repetitive’（重复的）这样的多音节词汇。

Speaking & Communication: 口语与交流：

In rebuttals, try to name the fallacy immediately (e.g., 'That is a clear example of a slippery slope fallacy') before explaining why it fails. 在反驳中，尝试立即指出对方使用的谬误（例如，“这是一个明显的滑坡谬误”），然后再解释其失败的原因。

Critical Thinking: 批判性思维：

For Round 3 rebuttals, focus on linking the prior rebuttal's point back to one's original core arguments. 针对第三轮反驳，重点是将前一轮反驳的观点重新与自己最初的核心论点联系起来。

Recommended Supplementary Learning Resources or Homework 推荐的补充学习资源或家庭作业

Review the correlation/causation examples and prepare initial notes for the 'Eat Less Meat' debate. 复习相关性/因果性的例子，并为“少吃肉”的辩论准备初步笔记。