Things That Irritate You in Life

Today in school My teacher decided to bring up animal rights and talked about Why PETA is good.









Oh boy........

What was the purpose of doing this within an English class ?

I mean was it to create a topical debate where the students use spoken or written English to construct an argument and improve use / proficiency?

Or was she just like "you know what.. screw grammar and punctuation and oral proficiency in the language as I'm just going to get on my PETA soap box"?
 
What was the purpose of doing this within an English class ?

I mean was it to create a topical debate where the students use spoken or written English to construct an argument and improve use / proficiency?

Or was she just like "you know what.. screw grammar and punctuation and oral proficiency in the language as I'm just going to get on my PETA soap box"?
I think a student brought it up at the beginning of class and our teacher started rambling on about it for around 5-10 minutes after that.
 
What was the purpose of doing this within an English class ?

I mean was it to create a topical debate where the students use spoken or written English to construct an argument and improve use / proficiency?

Or was she just like "you know what.. screw grammar and punctuation and oral proficiency in the language as I'm just going to get on my PETA soap box"?
We were forced to sit through blackfish and write an argument for it against whales in captivity, unfortunately a lot of students saw it as an anti captivity altogether thing and I honestly don’t think my English teacher wanted that as she always applauded my pro zoo pieces of writing and I know she’s well educated on animals. I was very unhappy at the time however as we were given no counter argument and we were only told about the situation from the “PETA” point of view so I was a lot more level headed in said piece of writing, it was just a shame that my classmates didn’t have this knowledge.
 
We were forced to sit through blackfish and write an argument for it against whales in captivity, unfortunately a lot of students saw it as an anti captivity altogether thing and I honestly don’t think my English teacher wanted that as she always applauded my pro zoo pieces of writing and I know she’s well educated on animals. I was very unhappy at the time however as we were given no counter argument and we were only told about the situation from the “PETA” point of view so I was a lot more level headed in said piece of writing, it was just a shame that my classmates didn’t have this knowledge.

I don't think that what she did really encouraged critical thinking did it ?

I mean it seems to me that she should have included the counter argument as part and parcel of the class.

Any polemical class whether on history, politics, art, literature etc should include counter arguments so that students can see both sides of the argument and form their own opinions / stance and are also able to see and have insights into other perspectives.
 
It didn't get that bad, but Now half of my class think Animals shouldn't be kept in captivity........ :eek:

Next time , you should just interject and try to present the other side of the argument.

I know you are capable of doing this as I've read some of the comments you have written on this forum which are very articulate and well reasoned.
 
Next time , you should just interject and try to present the other side of the argument.

I know you are capable of doing this as I've read some of the comments you have written on this forum which are very articulate and well reasoned.
Oh I did;). Teacher ignored the response though, We weren't allowed to unmute our zoom mics So I had to type a response in the private chat box.
 
I don't think that what she did really encouraged critical thinking did it ?

I mean it seems to me that she should have included the counter argument as part and parcel of the class.

Any polemical class whether on history, politics, art, literature etc should include counter arguments so that students can see both sides of the argument and form their own opinions / stance and are also able to see and have insights into other perspectives.
Yes I’d agree with this completely, I think a lot of my class know my stance on the subject of zoos as I can get a bit carried away after a little thing is mentioned, they aren’t daft kids and I’ve had conversations about it with quite a few of them which from what I’ve gathered, social media seems to be very contradictory on the topic as do a lot of the general public which influences the thoughts and opinions of people who simply haven’t done their research.
 
Speaking of this, I corrected a geography teacher over zoom when he tried to tell the class polar bears have white fur, I don’t like being that kid, but I couldn’t help it ;)
And my biology teacher (who is a great guy, but got something wrong) said That Bonobos were a subspecies of Chimp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JT
Yes I’d agree with this completely, I think a lot of my class know my stance on the subject of zoos as I can get a bit carried away after a little thing is mentioned, they aren’t daft kids and I’ve had conversations about it with quite a few of them which from what I’ve gathered, social media seems to be very contradictory on the topic as do a lot of the general public which influences the thoughts and opinions of people who simply haven’t done their research.

Agree, I think the key word here is nuance and it is exactly that which is lacking on social media sound bites.

I would actually class my view as occupying the middle ground when it comes to zoos.

However, for animal rights activists I would be labeled a pro-zoo person and here on the forum zoochatters who are uncritical supporters of zoos occasionally insinuate that I am anti-zoo.

But I'm neither a "zoo apologist" / fanatic or a "fifth columist" anti zoo activist, I'm just a conservationist who recognizes that zoos can and do play a key role in conservation whilst also being critical of zoos which don't.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JT
Agree, I think the key word here is nuance and it is exactly that which is lacking on social media sound bites.

I would actually class my view as occupying the middle ground when it comes to zoos.

However, for animal rights activists I would be labeled a pro-zoo person and here on the forum zoochatters who are uncritical supporters of zoos occasionally insinuate that I am anti-zoo.
I think it’s very important to remain level headed and consider other people’s views, I think people on both sides of the fence can be too blinded by what they think is right to see flaws. Personally I’d regard myself as pro zoo, but I also acknowledge that zoos are far from perfect and I hope in the future we can work towards better standards and better programmes in all zoos. Whatever your opinion is, you have to remain open minded or you aren’t going to get anywhere.
 
Back
Top