I used a case study (widely used in English classes in MBA programs) on how to deal with global warming in business situations. This ranges from predicting the future costs of global warming on business (or benefits), having a policy or stand on global warming, the benefits of using green technology in response to global warming etc. An international businessperson should be able to express their stance on environmental issues in English.
In continental Europe global warming is not particularly controversial in politics, public opinion, the business world or academia.
Far more controversial topics are taught in English classes. It’s typical to open up a section of a class by stating an outrageous stance on a controversial topic to start up a heated debate. Students who otherwise stay quiet and uninterested in class engage in the class, speak spontaneously and learn to defend their views in English in a hostile environment.
An international businessperson should be able to express their stance on environmental issues in English.
That sounds correct to me, however there is a danger that membership in a tribe other than that of the professor will undermine the student’s grade or standing in the eyes of the professor. Which in fact looks like it may have happened in your case.
In continental Europe global warming is not particularly controversial in politics, public opinion, the business world or academia.
Well apparently it was controversial in your class. Anyway, so that I understand what you are saying, can you please tell me your definition of “global warming”?
Well apparently it was controversial in your class.
That struck me, too, so I reread, and the point is that disagreement was produced by mixing students from Latin America with a class in continental Europe.
That struck me, too, so I reread, and the point is that disagreement was produced by mixing students from Latin America with a class in continental Europe.
I noticed that too, but I think it doesn’t really undermine my point that he injected a politically controversial issue into an English class. Perhaps a better way to put it is to observe that he injected an issue where beliefs depend a lot on tribal membership so to speak. Even if most of the people where the university is located are members of the Correct Tribe, it’s still a red flag.
ETA: Besides which, I am skeptical of the claim that “global warming” is uncontroversial in continental Europe as opposed to other parts of the world. (Of course it is unclear what “global warming” means and interestingly a lot of the fervent believers in “global warming” are not able to define the phrase.)
Here is the Wikipedia article on “Climate Change Opinion by Country.”
In particular, have a look at the maps in the upper right. It actually looks like people in Latin America are MORE likely to believe that “rising temperatures are a result of human activities” than people from continental Europe.
I used a case study (widely used in English classes in MBA programs) on how to deal with global warming in business situations. This ranges from predicting the future costs of global warming on business (or benefits), having a policy or stand on global warming, the benefits of using green technology in response to global warming etc. An international businessperson should be able to express their stance on environmental issues in English.
In continental Europe global warming is not particularly controversial in politics, public opinion, the business world or academia.
Far more controversial topics are taught in English classes. It’s typical to open up a section of a class by stating an outrageous stance on a controversial topic to start up a heated debate. Students who otherwise stay quiet and uninterested in class engage in the class, speak spontaneously and learn to defend their views in English in a hostile environment.
That sounds correct to me, however there is a danger that membership in a tribe other than that of the professor will undermine the student’s grade or standing in the eyes of the professor. Which in fact looks like it may have happened in your case.
Well apparently it was controversial in your class. Anyway, so that I understand what you are saying, can you please tell me your definition of “global warming”?
That struck me, too, so I reread, and the point is that disagreement was produced by mixing students from Latin America with a class in continental Europe.
I noticed that too, but I think it doesn’t really undermine my point that he injected a politically controversial issue into an English class. Perhaps a better way to put it is to observe that he injected an issue where beliefs depend a lot on tribal membership so to speak. Even if most of the people where the university is located are members of the Correct Tribe, it’s still a red flag.
ETA: Besides which, I am skeptical of the claim that “global warming” is uncontroversial in continental Europe as opposed to other parts of the world. (Of course it is unclear what “global warming” means and interestingly a lot of the fervent believers in “global warming” are not able to define the phrase.)
Here is the Wikipedia article on “Climate Change Opinion by Country.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_opinion_by_country
In particular, have a look at the maps in the upper right. It actually looks like people in Latin America are MORE likely to believe that “rising temperatures are a result of human activities” than people from continental Europe.