Erasmussiegel für Essener Schule

Anlässlich des Europatages am Montag, dem 9. Mai 2022, verleiht Oberbürgermeister Thomas Kufen im Rathaus Essen der Goetheschule das Qualitätssiegel der Kultusministerkonferenz für ihr Erasmus Plus-Projekt Post-FactEUal. Transforming Europe from the 1930s to the Present, welches die Schule von 2018 bis 2021 mit Partnern aus Dänemark, den Niederlanden, Italien und Zypern durchgeführt hat.

Das Erasmus Plus Quality Label erhalten nach eingehender Prüfung der Aktivitäten und Ergebnisse durch den Pädagogischen Austauschdienst (PAD) nur herausragende Projekte, die sich durch Innovation, Nachhaltigkeit, Wirkung und Übertragbarkeit sowie bildungspolitische Relevanz auszeichnen. Die Begründung der Jury lesen Sie hier.

Im Jahr 2021 wurden 407 Erasmusprojekte in Deutschland abgeschlossen. Davon erhielten nur 26 Schulpartnerschaften das Qualitätssiegel. Das von der Goetheschule koordinierte Projekt gehört damit zu den besten 6% in Deutschland.

Verleihung Quality Label Erasmus Projekt der Goetheschule
Oberbürgeremeister Thomas Kufen und Dr. Nicola Haas, Schulleiterin der Goetheschule
09.05.2022 Foto: Elke Brochhagen

Während am 9. Mai in Russland militärische Stärke in einer großen Parade demonstriert wird, geht der Oberbürgermeister in seiner Rede explizit auf den russischen Angriffskrieg gegen die Ukraine und Putins Versuch ein, dies als ‘Spezialaktion’ zur Entnazifizierung zu rechtfertigen. Damit, so sagt er, habe das Projekt der Goetheschule, das sich gegen aggressiven Nationalismus, Populismus und Propaganda richtet, leider bis zum heutigen Tag nichts an Aktualität eingebüßt.

Hier der Bericht der Westdeutschen Allgemeinen Zeitung zur Preisverleihung für das Projekt: WAZ 17.5.2022

Personal Development

Teachers at Goetheschule Essen have successfully applied for Erasmus funding to finance a teacher workshop series in Lithuania from 29th May 2022 to 3rd June 2022. Together with their colleagues from Lithuania, Spain, Poland and Denmark, they will focus on character-building and personal development in and outside the classroom.

Teacher Preparation of Staff Training in Lithuania 

For a truly holistic education, it is indispensable that teachers are aware of how personal development might be promoted and what individuals need for personal fulfilment. Since teachers play an important role in the character-building process of their students, they should not rely merely on their own professional experience but also on a sound theoretical framework.

During the preparatory phase, teachers will therefore do extensive reading on character
education. Teachers should also familiarise themselves with the concept of ‘personal mastery’, a set of specific principles and practices that – according to Peter Senge – enables people to create personal visions, reflect their aspirations and turn into life-long learners.

Tasks

1. All teachers read Peter Senge, ‘Personal Mastery’ and Alfred Bandura, ‘Self-Efficacy’. Each participant prepares a minimum of two observations/reflections drawn from each article, which they will bring up for discussion in the workshop.

2. Each participant reads at least one more article on character-building. The articles to be prepared will focus on:

a) Student well-being in a time of crisis (LIT)
b) Global mindedness (ES)
c) Critical thinking (DE)
d) CAS (DK)
e) Reflections and projections on the IB learner profile (PL)

3. Teachers prepare a PowerPoint which gives a) their two observations/reflections/ issues to debate from each of the two articles (Senge & Bandura); b) the findings of their further reading.

Workshop Schedule 

Day 1

Workshop 1: Approaches to character education

Teachers from various disciplines, especially those who work as guidance and career counsellors or mediators, will discuss different approaches to character education based on their reading. Teachers will present their PPTs and exchange ideas about the following questions:

  • What constitutes character education?
  • What role do social and emotional learning, life skills education, health education, violence prevention, critical thinking, ethical and moral reasoning and conflict resolution play?
  • What are important points of criticism concerning character education?
  • What methods and approaches are recommendable/objectionable?

Workshop 2: Tools for Character Education

Teachers will meet with different stakeholders from the Lithuanian school to see how the International Baccalaureate Learner Profile, which is shared by all project schools, may be used as a stimulus for character education.

Workshop 3: Exchange of Best Practice I

Teachers will share best practice about how the IB learner profile attributes are visible in the respective schools. Denmark and Lithuania will present ideas about how to foster the IB learner profile attributes “CARING, OPEN-MINDED” (DK) and “BALANCED, REFLECTIVE” (LIT).

Day 2

Workshop 4: Exchange of Best Practice II

Teachers will share best practice about how the IB learner profile attributes are visible in the respective schools. Spain and Poland will present ideas about how to foster the IB learner profile attributes “KNOWLEDGEABLE, INQUIRERS, THINKERS” (ES) and “RISKTAKERS, COMMUNICATORS, PRINCIPLED”.

Workshop 5: A Character Education Programme 

Teachers discuss the following questions:

  • How can schools successfully implement and maintain a character education programme?
  • What professional steps may be taken by teachers to help students
    to become aware of their personal pursuits and guiding values, develop a sense of commitment and fully understand their personality?
  • What problems have been encountered there so far ? How could they be overcome?
  • What means could be used for assessing and evaluating a character education programme?

Workshop 6: Europass 
Teachers will be introduced to Europass by the German coordinator. They will be shown how to use the Europass Language Passport, Curriculum Vitae and the Europass Mobility as a basis for portfolio work at schools in order to foster and document students’ personal advancement.

Day 3

Workshop 7: Panel Discussion and Final Output

Panel Discussion: Teachers will exchange best practice about how character education may help to solve problems affecting their students, such as truancy, bullying, low self-esteem and addiction, anxiety and depression and group conflicts.

According to Peter Senge, “People with a high level of personal mastery live in a continual learning mode. They never ‘arrive’.” Another question may thus be how  schools may promote life-long learning.

Group Work: Teachers will design digital or non-digital posters to visualise the results of their discussions and the exchange of best practice. They will compile an annotated bibliography with recommended articles.

Day 4

Worshop 8: Character-Building in Practice (Add-on)

Teachers will attend the final presentations of the student project week on personal development. Both the student project week  and the teacher workshops will be critically evaluated. Ideas to guide the pedagogical development of the schools with regards to character education and personal mastery will be reflected upon in a joined session by both teachers and students.

Self-Fashioning

Für unser Erasmusprojekt  in Litauen vom 29. Mai. bis 3. Juni 2022 gibt es noch Plätze. Bewerben können sich Schülerinnen und Schüler der Jgst. 10 bis Freitag, 6. Mai 2022. Thema der Projektarbeit: Personal Development. Wir schauen uns an, welchen Einfluss soziale Medien auf die Persönlichkeitsentwicklung haben. Dazu arbeitet Ihr in international gemischten Gruppen mit Schülerinnen und Schülern aus dem Gastgeberland Litauen, aus Polen, Dänemark und Spanien.

Mögliche Themen der Projektwoche:

1. Identity and our digital footprint – What is the relationship between our personality and what we do on the internet?

2. Digital portraits and media avatars – How are media personalities constructed across multiple media outlets?

3. Between authenticity and fake – What is the current role of self-fashioning?

4. Between integrity and fake – What is the current role of influencers online?

5. Social or anti-social – How does the internet influence group communication and interaction online and offline?

6. Dopamine and depression – What are the psychological effects of social media use on individuals?

Wie bewirbt man sich?

Ihr erstellt eine Arbeit zum Thema “Self-Fashioning”, z. B. eine PPT, ein Essay, eine kommentierte Collage. Dabei vergleicht ihr in englischer Sprache, wie Menschen sich früher in Szene gesetzt haben, am Beispiel eines Künstlers, Bildhauers oder Fotografen, und welche Formen der digitalen Selbstinszenierung heute gewählt werden.

Students look into the history of self-fashioning by combining art and social media.

  • How were paintings, photographs, sculptures or other artistic representations of a person designed in different periods of art?
  • How are they similar/different to portraits and self-portraits on social media platforms?
  • How important is a user’s social media personality and to what extent can it be inferred from visual attributes in their feed?
  • How do selfies and social media portraits influence self-expression and identity construction? To what extent do they change our self-perception?

These are some of the questions you will need to consider when analysing art work and evaluating your own self-representation and/or the self-fashioning of your idols. Feel free to choose a creative way to present your findings, for example in form of a COLLAGE.

TIPS:
1. It might help to narrow down your topic, for example to
– Beauty
– Fashion
– Old Age
– Youth
– Maculinity
– Femininity
– Sportiness
– Humour
– Intellect
– Love of…

2. When comparing social media to artwork, choose an in-depth approach. To learn about ONE particular artist and ONE blogger or influencer may be more interesting than a gallery of different creators, styles and periods.

3. It might help others to understand your chosen visual representations if you explain your choice.

4. Give your sources and don’t plagiarize.

Ansprechpartnerin: Frau Heup

Erasmus im Europaviertel

Wie arbeitet das Europäische Parlament? Wie wird Politik im ‚Council of Europe’ gemacht? Im Rahmen unserer Erasmuswoche zum Thema Democratic and Civic Engagement in Strasbourg haben unsere Schülerinnen und Schüler am 6. April 2022 zwei zentrale europäische Institutionen im Europaviertel besucht und dadurch einen tieferen Einblick in die demokratischen Prozesse unserer EU bekommen. So durften sie im Europäischen Parlament die katalanische Abgeordnete Diana Riba zu ihrem Engagement für die katalanische Unabhängigkeitsbestrebung und ihre Arbeit über „Gender Violence“ befragen und an einer Plenarsitzung zum Data Governance Act teilnehmen, der weitreichende Regelungen zum Schutz von Daten von Firmen und Privatpersonen vorsieht.

Das Straßburger Parlamentsgebäude, in dem sich der Plenarsaal und die Abgeordnetenbüros befinden, trägt den Namen der Französin Louise Weiß, die ihr Leben der europäischen Idee und Friedensbewegung gewidmet hat. Die vollständige Verglasung des Parlamentsgebäudes ist ein Sinnbild für offene und transparente Demokratie; das unvollendete Erscheinungsbild des Daches verweist darauf, dass das Projekt Europa ständig im Wandel begriffen ist.

Während der Führung durch den Europarat ging es um Menschenrechte und um die Frage nach der Wirksamkeit entsprechender Resolutionen. Ein besonders aktueller Bezug ergab sich durch den Ausschluss Russlands aus dem Rat, dem dadurch seit Kurzem nur noch 46 Mitgliedsstaaten angehören. Russlands hatte nach der Invasion der Ukraine einen Austritt zum Jahresende angekündigt, wurde aber im März 2022 durch mehrheitlichen Beschluss aufgrund der Verletzung des Völkerrechtes vom Europarat ausgeschlossen.

Die Tage in Strasbourg hatten die Schülerinnen und Schüler vorbereitet durch eine eigene aktive Auseinandersetzung mit bürgerlichem Engagement. Portfolios über freiwillige Arbeit und Videos über kritisches Denken und Argumentieren waren so bereits im Vorfeld entstanden.

Erasmus und Critical Thinking

Zur Vorbereitung für Modul 3 in unserem Erasmusprojekt Transdigital Education gehörte auch die Auseinandersetzung mit der Frage, was kritisches Denken ausmacht und wie man Fehler in einer scheinbar schlüssigen Argumentation erkennt. Die Schülerinnen und Schüler der Jgst. 11 erstellten deshalb Videos über logische Denkfehler (Englisch: fallacies), die uns im Alltag, aber auch in politischer Rhetorik immer wieder begegnen.

Zwei deutsche Filmbeiträge wurden im Plenum von den Schülerinnen und Schülern aus Deutschland, Dänemark, Litauen, Polen und Spanien unter die besten Video-Clips gewählt: Ein Film über Logikfehler in der Diskussion über Covid-Impfungen und ein Gespräch zwischen Pinguin, Elefant und Papagei zum Thema Klimaerwärmung.

Film 1: Covid Vaccinations 

Script:

The students of a class were supposed to prepare a short presentation on their opinions about the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss their reasonings afterward. The camera focusses on Josephine. She has already begun her presentation and you see her while making her last few claims.

Josephine: In my research, I have found that you might very well say that a Covid-19 vaccination is useless. A good friend of my aunt’s cousin twice removed actually died even though she got all the recommended vaccinations. So the Covid vaccination is obviously useless.

One might even go as far as to say that vaccinations in general are utterly useless.

Who is to say if my aunt’s dear friend might not still be alive if she had not got vaccinated? I’m sure she would still be with us if only if only she had not trusted her doctors.

The vaccine was probably even harmful, since she died afterwards. So why take the risk of a vaccination? After all, many people say that Covid is nothing but a flu.

The camera focuses on the audience. Cosima looks very supportive of Josephine. Mirja looks confused, disbelieving, and a little disturbed.

Josephine: Some say the only thing that possibly helps against the pandemic is distance, but this is nonsense. What an idea to suggest that no one should ever again be in contact with anyone outside their immediate circle of friends and family! It is completely unrealistic.

I thank you all for your attention and will end my presentation here.

Cosima (very excited): Well, I think that your presentation was extremely good! Just great!

Josephine (happily): Thank you!

Mirja (loudly): What are you talking about? What she said doesn’t make any sense! She came to completely wrong conclusions and didn’t have any reliable proof to back up her claims!

Cosima: (defensively) How can you say that? Josephine is my best friend and I would believe her if she told me that pigs can fly because her dogwalker’s boyfriend says so. Whom she believes I believe! And she is one of the best students in this class, by the way. She would never draw wrong conclusions.

Mirja: Stop defending her just because she’s your friend! You should support or rather shouldn’t support the ARGUMENT and not the person!

Cosima: (defensively): She is smart and wouldn’t make any mistake concerning the logical validity of her arguments.

Mirja: How do you know she is that smart?

Cosima: Because she wouldn’t make mistakes like that. It’s as simple as that!

Josephine: Yes, it is. Why are you so mean to me? You just don’t like my presentation because we two aren’t best friends.

Mirja: This has nothing to do with it. It’s just that your claims are illogical.

Josephine: Why do you hate me?

Pause Mirja: to the camera: exhausted: I give up. Is there no logic anymore?

Film is rewound.

Explanations:

Josephine: A good friend of my aunt’s cousin twice removed actually died even though she got all the recommended vaccinations. So the Covid vaccination is obviously useless. One might even go as far as to say that vaccinations in general are utterly useless.

Hasty generalisation: A single death does not speak against the general medical efficacy of a vaccine or vaccines in general.

Who is to say if my aunt’s dear friend might not still be alive if she had not got vaccinated? I’m sure she would still be with us if only if only she had not trusted her doctors.

Argument ad ignorantiam: the fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it cannot be be proven false.

The vaccine was probably even harmful, since she died afterwards.

Fallacy of the single cause or Causal reasoning fallacy: many different causes of death should have been considered here

So why take the risk of a vaccination? After all, many people say that Covid is nothing but a flu.

False analogy: Covid death rates are far higher; long-term effects of Covid infections are not yet fully known

Some say the only thing that possibly helps against the pandemic is distance, but this is nonsense. What an idea to suggest that no one should ever again be in contact with anyone outside their immediate circle of friends and family! It is completely unrealistic.

Appeal to extremes: attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes

Josephine is my best friend and I would believe her if she told me that pigs can fly

Ad hominem:

She is smart and wouldn’t make any mistake concerning the logical validity of her arguments.

She is smart because she wouldn’t make mistakes like that. It’s as simple as that!

Circular reasoning: talking in circles

Why do you hate me?

Loaded questions: contains the assumption that the student hates the other one

Pause Mirja: to the camera: exhausted: I give up. Is there no logic anymore?

Don’t give up. Become a critical thinker!

 

Film 2: Global Warming

Script: 

P: Hey, Mr Elephant, I heard you make this weird remark about climate change as if you didn’t believe it’s real. What was that about?

E: Well, I don’t really think it’s such a big deal. I have never heard of a lion or a zebra that died of climate change, so I don’t see how it should affect us elephants. There is still snow on the Kilimanjaro from time to time, so why worry about snow and ice in Antarctica?

Parrot: Hasty generalisations!

P: Yes, indeed. My brothers and sisters are already affected by climate change and it is only a matter of time until it will destroy your habitat, too. Do you know how many penguins die every year? We must act now or it will soon be too late.

E: I’m not quite sure about this. I mean times change, seasons change, fashion changes. Why worry about climate change?

Parrot: False analogy!

P: Because man-made climate change is not a natural phenomenon and it cannot be reversed, unlike a fashion trend that people do not fancy anymore.

E: I don’t think it’s that dramatic. I mean how hard can it be to stop man-made climate change? All we need to do is to stop flying.

P: What?

E: You know what I mean. No flying around in airplanes, no carbon, no climate change. Even an elephant knows that much.

Parrot: Dicto simpliciter.

P: Yes, or single cause fallacy. Come on, you know climate change is a far more complex problem.

E: Well, all I know is that the prediction for tomorrow is that it will be warm and sunny in Africa. And the same it true for next week’s and next month’s prediction. So why worry about next year’s or next decade’s predictions?

Parrot: Eeeeh, equivocation.

P: True, this is an equivocation. You speak of predictions, but you are actually mixing up two completely different terms: weather and climate.

E: Not the same thing?

P: Goodness, of course not. Do I really need to remind you that it is climate that might soon wipe my entire species off the face of the earth?

E: Ha, now I got you! You appeal to pity. Ad misericordiam! Yes, that’s what it is. Ad misericordiam.

P: No, it’s not, because it’s not an illicit appeal to gain your sympathy. We see biodiversity loss already. It is therefore a valid argument. Extinction is a real danger. Don’t you know anything about science?

E: Well, science or no science, rain or shine, I can’t say I really care.

P: I can’t believe you are so ignorant!

Parrot: Ad hominem.

E: What are you saying?

P: You have absolutely no clue, you with your gigantic trunk and your tiny brain!

Parrot: Ad hominem.

E: What does my trunk have to do with this?

P: You are such a stupid creature!

Parrot: Ad hominem.

P: Listen, elephant. If you are not interested in science, then we have nothing to say to each other anymore. You better think twice. I do not want anything to do with a dumb flat-earther. Climate change actions must be our number one priority! Are you with me or against me?

Parrot: False dilemma.

P: Shush. Shut up, you silly bird, I have nearly won him over. Again: Are you with me or against me?

E: I don’t know…

Parrot: False dilemma, false dilemma.

P: I told you to shut up, you daft bird, or I will pluck out every single feather of yours…

Parrot: Ad parrot!

Parrot: Ad parrot!!

Parrot: Ad parrot!!!

Help!!!

Film 3: Everyday Fallacies

Script:

P1 and P2 just left class and sit down next to each other. On the table sits another girl.

P2 English class was hard. I don’t like the topic

P1 God, slavery was horrible. It is so disgusting that people really thought of black people that way.

P3 Mhmmm, I…..

P2 Don’t say a thing. You are just a racist believing everything is God’s will.

(Cut to a narrator: That is a fallacy. P2 is just Poisoning the Well. Do you see the problem here? Before P3 could even say something about the topic P2 already talked badly about P3. This already influenced the opinion of P1 and the audience)

P3 I am not racist and the fact that I believe in God doesn’t make me a person that just discriminates another human being because of their looks.

P1 Guys, please stop arguing. Could we please just talk about something else?

P2 Fine. Let’s plan what we want to do after school. I have only one class left.

P3 Me too. (Mumbled)

P1 I would like to go shopping. P3, do you want to join us?

P3 I would love to.

P2 Oh, I just remembered I can’t go. I have a huge load of homework. Teachers are just the worst, they always give us extra work because they don’t like students.

(Narrator: Do all teachers dislike students? No, this is a hasty generalisation. When you say something that general and pretend it was universally true regardless of the circumstances or the individuals you commit a Dicto-Simpliciter Fallacy.)

P1 I happen to know, that your teachers give everyone in class the same amount of work even though they like a few students. My teacher likes me and I still have to do my work. It’s their job to teach us.

P3 I hate doing homework, every time I sit down and want to start, it begins to rain. And I really don’t like rain.

(Narrator: And again P3 committed a fallacy. To connect two completely independent situations that don’t have a real connection is called a Post Hoc Fallacy.)

P1 Stop, exaggerating. You know that your homework doesn’t influence the weather. What about tomorrow? Do you have time for shopping then?

P2 I still can’t go shopping. We could do something different.

P3 What’s wrong with shopping?

P2 It’s just the COVID-restrictions. I would have to be vaccinated

P1 What? You aren’t vaccinated?

P2 No, the vaccine is deadly. My cousin died because she got the vaccine.

P1 You said your cousin died because of a stroke.

P2 Yeah, but she got the vaccine three weeks before. The vaccine is the only explanation.

(Narrator: Wrong, wrong, wrong! P2 started with a hypothesis that is not true and drew a conclusion without proper evidence. This is a false syllogism. When she claims that the vaccine must have caused the death of P2’s cousin, she ignores all other possible causes. This is a hpothesis-contrary-to-fact-fallacy.)

Bell ringing

P3 I have to go to Maths. Bye.

P1 I will text you about our plans, but I have class as well.

P2 Bye, see you tomorrow.

Narrator: Has it ever occurred to you how many logical errors we tend to make every day? Think about it. When did you notice false reasoning the last time?