Cultural relics教案1
teaching goals:
1. to learn to tell facts from opinions.
2. to write a reply letter.
3. to learn to talk about cultural relics.
teaching procedures:
step 1 warming up
purpose: to get ss to know the difference between a fact and an opinion.
1. definition
a fact must be real, objective and without a personal judgment. so it can be proved. an opinion always expresses one’s own ideas. it is always subjunctive. so it has not been proved.
2. read the passage (p5) and answer the following questions:
(1) if you want to go in for law against somebody, and if you want to win, what’s the most important thing you should do first?
(2) what makes a judge decide which eyewitness he can believe and which not?
suggested answers:
(1) searching for facts. the more, the better.
(2) the evidences offered by the eyewitnesses.
step 2 guided reading
1. read the passage and define what evidence is.
2. read the passage and translate each paragraph into chinese.
3. read and underline all the useful expressions or collocations in the part.
suggested answers:
collocation from using language on page 5
in a trial, rather than, more than, to tell the truth, agree with, it can be proved that ..., no reason to, a reply to, think highly of, search for, return…to…
step 3. note taking
listen to the tape and fill in the forms (p5).
as we know, people have never stopped searching for the amber room. this time we'll listen to what three people say they know about the missing amber room. get ss to share their forms and tell what are facts and what are opinions in the three forms.
step 4 speaking
purpose: 1. to learn how to ask for or give opinions.
2. to learn how to write a letter of suggestions.
1. group work
(1) we often use some expressions to ask for opinions. what are they?
what do you think of ...?
do you believe ... ?
how can you be sure of ...?
how do you know that?
(2) we often use some expressions to give opinions. what are they?
i think ...
i don't think ...
i don't agree that ...
i suppose that ...
suggested answers:
of the three eyewitnesses, only anna petrov has no selfish reason. in particular, she is not involved in any current effort to find the treasure. therefore she is the most believable.
jan hasek is less believable because he owns a little restaurant near the mine. if the search stopped, his business would suffer.
hans braun is also less believable, because somebody has asked him for help.
