Far across the distant galaxy, there is a little planet called Earth. There lived a student named Leo, who really enjoyed his recent ELL seminar.
This is the best seminar in his MYP study; however, most of the ideas he contributed were ‘high-quality’. Bear in mind that he didn’t do any preparation before that thrilling, marvelous, and florid seminar. The only thing that served as his impetus during the discussion was his passion for ELL learning. There is a tempest in his brain, and his head ached shortly after the class ended. He pooled every piece of knowledge he stored in his dusty library of his mind, from an infant to a handsome-looking teenager.
What made that seminar so fascinating was the students participation; their considerable answers made the questions even better. The star of this seminar was Joshua, who showed profound understanding of ethical and moral choices, dark tourism, etc. He always discovered the erratic pronunciation and the appalling, blood curdling grammatical mistakes when Leo was explaining why we should take dark tourism and learn from aborminable views. He had also pointed out that I should speak louder.
‘Leo.’
‘Yes.’
‘You are speaking like a mosquito.’
‘…’
The most wonderful question is: why should we visit places like Chernobyl?
I said: We should learn from the past disaster and cherish the present. If the government of the country forbids people from visiting that place, then the government is callous because they are ruining human civilization’s future. If they do so, our children won’t even learn the truth before the apocalypse descended. It is true that somebody should admit what they have done; additionally, they should know what they have to do to compensate the people suffering in the tragedy.
There is nothing really boring in the seminar if you fully participate in the class discussion. Every question is well planned, and the seminar leaders (J and N) deserve 10 house points.
ATL skill reflection:
Communication Skill:
Give and receive meaningful feedback.
Use intercultural understanding to interpret communication.
Use a variety of speaking techniques to communicate with a variety of audiences.
Seminar is a college school activity; however, it could possibly be an effective way for students to share unique ideas, especially in middle school literature, I&S, or design class. In this seminar, we discussed the old saying, ‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do.’ In the following space, I would arrange the potential view of the students in G8 ELL:
It’s true that local people should embrace the ever-shifting world and abandon the negative practices of their culture (e.g., cannibalism, sexual abuse). However, it’s an immoral act to force them to accept it and destroy the local culture. As a result, humans have undertaken the divine mission of protecting the precious local cultural heritage and helping the local people step into modern society (a little bit paradoxical).
People shouldn’t behave in an uncivilized way in any place. For instance, it’s a well-known fact that spitting around would spread diseases like turberculosis, and people like that would turn out to be the culprits of epidemics. Do you want the local people to stalk you if you spit on the divine animals?
If the locals are uncivilized people, you can’t follow the vast majority of people in that country. You are a person who knows that spitting and excreting in public places can spread influenza, cholera, and many other creepy diseases. This statement is closely connected to the theory of individualism in psychology; you know what you usually do in public places. In summary, it’s not good to follow the uncivilized. What if the people were civilized people? Okay, when in Rome, do as the Romans do.
Dark tourism is crucial in many places. Human beings have a bad reputation for killing each other. In consequence, places like the nuked city, battle field, etc. are places for our future generations to visit, learn, and commemorate. Concealing this callous fact is a sinful crime against the entire human race.
So much for our seminar 2!
This is much easier to read now 🙂
Ok, the language issues are much improved. However, the incoherence isn’t satisfactorily remedied, better but not solved. In one paragraph you state that we should ‘do as the Romans do’, but then you argue that we shouldn’t if the locals are uncivilised. But how do we judge the relative civilised quality of a population? It’s confusing.
meao!
An interesting way of connecting to Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy style at the beginning 🙂
Is it easier to write self-criticism in third person?
A few spelling errors to be aware of: “aborminable”, “distorying”, “ture”, “chirdren” and check you use of their/there.
I like how you’ve connected your evaluation to the IB ATL skill 😉