Detect common weaknesses in arguments and distinguish evidence-based reasoning from fallacious reasoning.
Hour 1Input, visual explanation, listening
Hour 2Analysis, dialogue, interactive practice
Hour 3PC challenge, quiz, reflection
HOUR 1 · Input & Critical Comprehension60 MIN
Goal: Understand vocabulary, the visual concept and the listening message before producing academic language.
1A · Vocabulary Lab
Listen to every word. Choose four and create one climate-related sentence for each.
fallacy
falacia
A fallacy is an error in reasoning.
generalization
generalización
One example cannot represent everyone.
false cause
causa falsa
Two events together do not prove causation.
personal attack
ataque personal
Attack the argument, not the person.
assumption
suposición
An assumption may need evidence.
reliable
confiable
Reliable reasoning can be checked.
conclusion
conclusión
The conclusion must follow from the evidence.
logic
lógica
Logic connects evidence and conclusion.
1B · Visual Explanation
Test the logic before accepting the conclusion
Ask whether the EVIDENCE really supports the CONCLUSION. A fallacy is a reasoning error, not simply a grammar mistake.
Example 1
One example → everyone = weak generalization.
Example 2
Attack the person instead of the claim = personal attack.
Example 3
After this, therefore because of this = possible false cause.
1C · Listening First, Transcript Later
Before listening: Predict three academic words you may hear.
Question: Which fallacies appear in the listening?
Imagine a speaker says, My neighbour does not recycle, so recycling programs never work. This is a weak generalization because one person cannot represent an entire community. Another speaker says, The mayor is wrong about climate policy because he is not a scientist. That is a personal attack rather than a response to the evidence. Critical readers evaluate reasoning, not only vocabulary.
Hour 1 · Evidence & Submission
HOUR 2 · Analysis & Academic Interaction60 MIN
Goal: Analyze examples, interact with a partner and apply the unit concept through decisions rather than copying.
2A · Guided Dialogues
Listen, perform one dialogue, then replace one example with a climate issue from school, Villavicencio or Colombia.
Dialogue 1
Juan: My friend wastes water, so teenagers do not care about the environment.
Camila: That is too general. One example is not enough.
Dialogue 2
Teacher: Is the speaker wrong because you dislike the speaker?
Student: No. We must evaluate the evidence and reasoning.
Dialogue 3
Valentina: The temperature increased after the new road opened, so the road caused climate change.
Daniel: That conclusion needs much stronger evidence.
2B · Interactive Practice
Identify the reasoning problem
Choose the best category. Then check your result before continuing.
2C · Pair Analysis & Submission
HOUR 3 · PC Challenge, Assessment & Reflection60 MIN
Goal: Apply the concept to a climate-action problem, complete the unit assessment and identify the next learning goal.
