Level: Upper-Intermediate / Advanced
Theme: Life Challenges & Critical Thinking
Main goal: Reconnect 🤝 · Reactivate advanced language 💬 · Think deeply 🧠

1️⃣ Warm reconnection & emotional grounding (7 min) 🤝💬

Purpose: Lower pressure, rebuild trust, talking naturally.

Opening line :

“You’ve studied at a very high level before. Today isn’t about testing you — it’s about thinking together.”

Choose 2–3 questions:

• 🌱 What has been one unexpected challenge in your life recently?

  • Recently I have become a mother and that is a not an easy task, English has been pushing me much and I need to consider to retake. In my personal life I need to focus more and work on my objectives.

• ⏳ When life gets busy, what do people usually give up first?

• maybe give up to try, maybe give up to leave your goals behind and maybe giving up extra activities like courses online, or even exercise.

• 💪 Do challenges make people stronger, or just more realistic?

• more realistic because you need to write and plan what's the principal goal you need to do, that could make people stronger.

2️⃣ Framing the topic + prediction (5 min) 🎯🔮

Set the scene:

“We’re going to watch a woman who balances sport, work, study, and relationships. But the real topic is how she thinks under pressure.”

Prediction questions (spoken):

• 🥊 What challenges do you think she faces?

• she balances her life and that must be very hard.

• 🔁 What skills from sport could help her in life or study?

• I believe so, because those are small challenges.

Encourage soft language:

• She might be very active / I imagine she must have a very lifestyle / She probably doesn't[t have children to do everything.

3️⃣ First viewing – big picture only (8 min) 👀🎥

▶️ Watch without subtitles

After watching:

• 🧩 Describe Ruth using three adjectives

• 🎯 What seems to be her main challenge?

• ⭐ What impressed you the most?

🧠 Follow-up:

“What makes you say that?”

4️⃣ Second viewing – thinking & language (10 min) 🧠📌

Before watching again, write on the board:

Listen for 👂:
1️⃣ Challenging what you read
2️⃣ Looking at both sides
3️⃣ Hedging language

▶️ Watch again with subtitles ON

After watching, ask her to find:

• 🔍 One example of questioning information

• 🔄 One contrast word (however, but, on the other hand)

• 🌫 One hedging expression (suggests, might, could)

5️⃣ Language activation (10 min) ⚙️💬

A️⃣ Hedging upgrade (5 min) 🌫⬆️

Give a strong statement:

❗ “People should trust experts and never question information.”

Ask her to soften it:

• 🟡 It could be argued that…

• 🟡 Some people suggest that…

• 🟡 Experts may be right; however…

👉 Focus on meaning, not perfection.

B️⃣ Seeing both sides (5 min) 🔄⚖️

Prompt:

“Can too much critical thinking be a problem?”

Encourage:

• On the one hand… / On the other hand…

• However / Nevertheless

6️⃣ Personal connection & reflection (8 min) 💭❤️

This is the bonding moment.

Choose 2 questions:

• 🔄 Has your way of thinking changed over the years?

• 📱 Do you challenge information more now — or less?

• 🧭 Where would critical thinking help you most right now?

Let the conversation flow. This is where trust comes back.

7️⃣ Gentle wrap-up (2 min) 🌟🧘‍♀️

End with reassurance and confidence.

Closing line:

“Critical thinking isn’t about being right — it’s about being aware. And that’s something you clearly already have.”

Optional teaser:

“Next time, we can apply this to a more controversial topic — media, work culture, or success.”

Should Social Media Be Banned for Teenagers?

🧠 Read & Think

In recent years, several countries have discussed or introduced restrictions on social media use for teenagers. Supporters of these measures argue that social media can negatively affect mental health, self-esteem, and concentration, particularly among young people who are still developing emotionally. According to some studies, excessive use of social platforms may increase anxiety, reduce attention span, and encourage unhealthy comparisons.

However, others believe that banning social media is neither realistic nor effective. They argue that social media plays an important role in social connection, self-expression, and digital literacy. For many teenagers, online platforms are a space to build identity, find communities, and express opinions that they may not feel comfortable sharing offline. Critics of bans also suggest that education and guidance may be more effective than strict prohibition.

Rather than banning social media entirely, some experts propose regulated use, such as age-appropriate limits, parental involvement, and digital education. This approach aims to protect teenagers while also preparing them to navigate the digital world responsibly. The debate continues, as societies try to balance protection, freedom, and real-world practicality.

🧩 Language Activation (before writing)

👉 Do not write full answers yet. Just think or take notes.

1️⃣ Find one argument FOR restricting or banning social media.
2️⃣ Find one argument AGAINST banning it.
3️⃣ Underline or note hedging expressions in the text (e.g. some studies suggest, may, others believe).

💬 Reflection Question (main task)

GRAMMAR REVIEW CLICK HERE https://www.bbc.co.uk/learningenglish/english/features/conditionals_with_georgie/ep-240809

Answer briefly (5–8 lines):

If you were a teenager today, how do you think social media would affect you differently than it does now?

You may think about:

• 📱 mental health

• 🧠 identity and self-image

• 🤝 friendships and social pressure

• 📚 learning and concentration

🌫 Language support (use naturally)

You may use expressions like:

• It could be argued that…

• Some people believe…

• This may have an impact on…

• In my view…

🌟 Why this task matters

This is not about being right.

It’s about:

• 🧠 questioning information

• 🔄 seeing complexity

• 💬 expressing opinions responsibly

🤍 Important

“We’ll use your ideas — not to judge them — but to explore and refine your language next class.”

take (something) on
accept responsibility for a task or project, often in addition to one's usual duties.

• She decided to take on a new project at work, even though she was already busy.

• He’s always willing to take on extra tasks to help the team.

come up with (something)
think of or create an idea, solution, or plan.

• She came up with a brilliant marketing strategy that boosted sales.

• We need to come up with a new approach to meet the deadline.

put (something) in
contribute something to achieve a goal

• He’s been putting in a lot of effort to improve his performance at work.

• They put in long days and weekends to complete the project before the deadline.

knuckle down
start working very hard, especially after a period of not doing much.

• Let’s get rid of all the distractions and knuckle down so I can get this project done.

• The team needs to knuckle down and focus if they want to finish the project on time.

get ahead
make progress and move past others, or complete your tasks earlier than expected

• She worked hard to get ahead in her career and eventually became a manager.

• In order to get ahead in this company, you need to be proactive and take initiative.

look into (something)
investigate, or get information before you take action

• The HR department is looking into the complaints made by the employees.

• We need to look into new software options to improve our workflow.

get back to (someone)
speak to someone again later to give them a reply after you've looked into something

• I’ll get back to you with more information after I discuss it with the team.

• Can you get back to the client about their inquiry as soon as possible?

TOP TIPS!

• If you see the word ‘something’, it usually means the verb requires an object.

• If ‘something’ is in the middle of the phrasal verb, it means that it can be separated by the object (but doesn’t have to be).

• If ‘something’ is at the end of the phrasal verb, it means it cannot be separated.

• When a pronoun, e.g. him, her, them, is the object of a separable phrasal verb, it must go between the verb and the particle.

CRITICAL THINKING

Topic: Should powerful nations be able to take control of strategic territories?

“One way or another, we’re going to have Greenland.”

These words, spoken by former US President Donald Trump, reignited an international debate about power, sovereignty, and global security.

Greenland, the world’s largest island, lies between the Atlantic and Arctic oceans and is officially part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Although it has its own parliament and controls many domestic affairs, Denmark remains responsible for Greenland’s foreign policy, defence, and national security. For decades, many Greenlanders have expressed interest in eventual independence, arguing that political self-determination is a fundamental right.

However, Greenland’s strategic importance has increased significantly in recent years. As Arctic ice melts due to climate change, new shipping routes and access to natural resources have become possible. This has transformed the Arctic into a geopolitical hotspot, sometimes described as a new “Great Game,” where global powers compete for influence, control, and security.

The United States already operates a military base in Greenland and has long viewed the island as vital to its defence strategy. Trump justified his comments by expressing concerns that rival powers such as Russia or China could expand their influence in the region. Denmark, however, has firmly rejected these claims, dismissing them as exaggerated and politically motivated.

Trump’s remarks triggered strong backlash across Europe. Several European leaders accused the US of undermining international law and disrespecting national sovereignty. In response, Trump threatened to impose economic retaliation in the form of tariffs on European imports — a move that many analysts described as a diplomatic escalation rather than a constructive solution.

At the heart of this controversy lies a complex question: should strategic interests ever override the right of a territory to decide its own future? While some argue that global security requires decisive action by powerful nations, others warn that such thinking echoes colonial attitudes and could destabilize international relations.

HIGH-VALUE VOCABULARY & EXPRESSIONS

Geopolitics & Power

• strategic territory – an area important for military or political reasons

• sphere of influence – a region dominated by a powerful country

• geopolitical leverage – advantage gained through geography or power

• military footprint – the presence of armed forces in a region

Politics & Ethics

• sovereignty – a nation’s right to govern itself

• self-determination – the right of people to choose their political status

• colonial mindset – attitudes that justify control over other territories

• international law – rules governing relations between states

Conflict & Diplomacy

• economic retaliation – responding to criticism with economic punishment

• diplomatic fallout – negative consequences for international relations

• political posturing – statements made mainly to appear strong

• escalate tensions – make a conflict more serious

Opinion & Argumentation Language

• It could be argued that…

• Critics point out that…

• Supporters claim that…

• This raises ethical concerns about…

• A counterargument worth considering is…

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS (CRITICAL THINKING)

1. Should strategic and military concerns justify control over another territory?

2. To what extent should Greenland’s desire for independence influence international decisions?

3. Is Trump’s argument about security realistic or exaggerated?

4. Does threatening tariffs strengthen or weaken diplomatic relationships?

5. Are modern geopolitical conflicts a continuation of colonial thinking?

WRITING TASK – ARGUMENTATIVE PIECE / homework

Task:

Write 180–220 words answering the following question:

Should powerful nations be allowed to take control of strategically important territories in the name of global security?

Requirements:

• Present one clear position

• Include at least one counterargument

• Use hedging language (e.g. may, might, arguably, appears to)

• Use at least 5 words or expressions from the vocabulary list

• Conclude with a balanced or critical reflection

🎯 CLASS THEME

“Sports Betting Is Everywhere. Is That Dangerous?”

Based on: Katty Kay interviews Michael Lewis on phone-based sports betting

🧠 Learning Objectives

Students will:

• Analyze risks vs benefits of sports betting

• Question normalization and regulation

• Practice deep critical thinking

• Use hedging, contrast, and persuasion

• Defend opinions with ethical and social reasoning

🔥 WARM-UP (10 minutes)

Visual + provocation

Write on the board:

“Sports betting is just entertainment.”

Ask students to position themselves:

• ✅ Agree

• ❌ Disagree

• ⚖️ Not sure / It depends

Guiding questions:

• Why do you think sports betting has grown so fast?

• Is betting part of sports culture — or something new?

• Is it different from casinos or lotteries? Why?

👉 Don’t correct. Let them expose assumptions.

🎥 VIDEO TASK (Katty Kay & Michael Lewis)

Before watching – Prediction

Ask:

• What risks do you think Michael Lewis will mention?

• Who do you think is most affected by phone-based betting?

While watching – Focus questions

Students answer while watching:

1. Why does Michael Lewis believe people aren’t paying enough attention?

2. What makes phone-based betting more dangerous than traditional betting?

3. Who benefits the most from this system?

4. Who carries the biggest risk?

After watching – Initial reaction

Ask:

• Did anything surprise you?

• Did the video change your opinion? Why or why not?

🧩 KEY IDEAS TO EXPLORE (Teacher-guided)

Put these concepts on the board and unpack them together:

• Accessibility (24/7 betting, one click away)

• Addiction & impulsive behavior

• Young audiences

• Normalization through sports sponsorship

• Power imbalance (platforms vs users)

• Athletes & integrity of sports

⚖️ MAIN DEBATE (30–40 minutes)

Debate Motion:

“Sports betting does more harm than good to society.”

🧠 Divide students into 3 groups:

Group A —

PRO Sports Betting

They argue:

• Personal freedom and choice

• Economic benefits (taxes, jobs, sponsorships)

• Fans feel more engaged

• Athletes and clubs benefit financially

Group B —

ANTI Sports Betting

They argue:

• Addiction and mental health risks

• Targeting vulnerable people

• Corruption and match-fixing

• Sports lose their cultural value

Group C —

MODERATORS / CRITICAL OBSERVERS

They:

• Identify weak arguments

• Ask uncomfortable questions

• Look for contradictions

• Decide which side is more convincing

🗣️ LANGUAGE SUPPORT (VERY IMPORTANT)

Hedging & Nuance

Give them this toolkit:

• It could be argued that…

• One potential risk is…

• While I understand this point, I still believe…

• From an ethical perspective…

• In the long term…

• This raises the question of…

💣 DEEP CRITICAL QUESTIONS (Use to push them)

Use these when discussion slows down:

• Should sports betting be treated like cigarettes or alcohol?

• Is it ethical to advertise betting during live sports?

• Are athletes responsible for promoting betting platforms?

• Should governments profit from something that causes addiction?

• Is betting changing how we watch sports?

• Is “fun” a strong enough justification for social harm?

🔄 ROLE REVERSAL (Advanced & powerful)

Halfway through, tell students:

👉 Switch sides. Defend the opposite position.

This forces:

• Empathy

• Intellectual flexibility

• Deeper reasoning

🧠 FINAL REFLECTION (10 minutes)

Written or spoken:

Has sports betting crossed a line? If yes, where should the limit be?

OR

Should sports exist mainly for enjoyment, or is monetization inevitable?

Encourage:

• No “right answer”

• Balanced conclusions

• Personal but reasoned opinions

🧠 OPTIONAL EXTENSION (Homework / Next class)

• Research how sports betting is regulated in different countries.

Sports betting is regulated very differently around the world. Some countries, like the UK and much of Europe, allow sports betting but regulate it through licenses, age limits, advertising rules, and responsible-gambling requirements. Others, like the United States, leave regulation to individual states, creating a patchwork where betting is legal in some places and banned in others. In countries such as Brazil, sports betting has existed in a legal grey area and is now moving toward formal regulation. Meanwhile, places like China and much of the Middle East largely prohibit betting, allowing only limited state-run options or banning it entirely. Globally, the trend is shifting from simple legalization toward tighter controls focused on consumer protection and addiction prevention.

• Compare sports betting to social media algorithms

Sports betting and social media algorithms operate in similar ways by using data and behavioral design to keep users engaged. Both rely on personalization, instant feedback, and variable rewards to stimulate dopamine and encourage repeated use. Just as social media promotes endless scrolling through likes and notifications, sports betting platforms offer constant odds updates, live bets, and push alerts. In both cases, the business model benefits from prolonged attention, which raises concerns about addiction, loss of control, and mental health—especially when access is mobile, continuous, and lightly regulated.

• Watch another short clip and write a response or rebuttal

How Gambling Took Over America effectively shows how sports betting became normalized by aligning with sports, media, and digital platforms. However, it overstates inevitability and exploitation by underplaying the role of regulation and product design. The core issue is not gambling alone, but how algorithmic, mobile-first systems turn risk into constant engagement, placing sports betting within a broader attention-driven economy rather than a unique moral exception.

A📄 1.

How Gambling Took Over America

A long article that explores how gambling — especially sports betting — has become a cultural and economic force in the U.S., linking speculation, sports, and society. How Gambling Took Over America (Current Affairs)

This piece is good for broader ethical and cultural context.

Sports Betting Everywhere: When Watching Becomes Wagering

If you have watched professional sports at any point in the last few years, it is difficult not to notice how deeply sports betting has embedded itself into the viewing experience. What was once a background activity—limited to casinos, betting shops, or informal pools among friends—has now become a central feature of modern sports culture.

Today, sports broadcasts regularly include betting lines, odds, and predictions as part of their commentary. Analysts discuss whether a team is expected to score a certain number of points or win by a specific margin, information that directly mirrors what appears on betting platforms. These moments are often presented as neutral “statistics” or “insights,” but they also function as subtle prompts for viewers to place bets.

This shift is reinforced by the sheer volume of advertising. Betting companies such as DraftKings and FanDuel have become major sponsors of leagues, teams, and even stadiums themselves. Fans are greeted by slogans like “BET LOCAL” outside iconic venues or playful wordplay such as “HEY, BETTOR BETTOR!” on billboards near public transport stations. Online, the exposure is even more intense, with ads appearing before, during, and after games, as well as across social media and sports websites.

One particularly effective strategy used by betting platforms is the promise of “risk-free” or “free” bets. New users are often offered hundreds of dollars in bonus credit simply for opening an account and placing an initial wager. Phrases like “Looking for action? You came to the right place” frame betting as a natural extension of being a sports fan—almost as if watching without betting is incomplete or less exciting.

Critics argue that this constant presence has fundamentally altered the way sports are consumed. For viewers who are not interested in gambling, the focus on odds and bets can feel intrusive and distracting, reducing enjoyment of the game itself. For those who do participate, however, betting can reshape emotional engagement, shifting attention away from athletic performance and toward financial outcomes.

More broadly, there are growing concerns about the social impact of this normalization. Easy access through smartphones means that betting is no longer an occasional activity but something that can happen instantly, repeatedly, and in isolation. This raises questions about responsibility, regulation, and whether the current model prioritizes profit over the well-being of fans.

As sports betting continues to expand, an important debate remains unresolved: should sport exist primarily as a form of entertainment and shared cultural experience, or has it become another vehicle for constant monetization? The answer to this question may shape not only the future of sports, but also how audiences relate to them.

Critical Thinking & Discussion Questions

Understanding the Argument

1. According to the article, how has sports betting changed the way sports are presented to viewers?

2. What techniques do broadcasters and betting companies use to integrate gambling into sports coverage?

3. Why do you think betting information is often presented as “statistics” or “insights” rather than advertising?

Analysis & Interpretation HOMEWORK

4. How does the language used by betting companies (e.g., “free bets,” “looking for action”) influence audience perception?

5. In what ways does mobile and instant access to betting change user behavior compared to traditional gambling?

6. Do you think the article presents a balanced view, or does it lean toward a critical stance? Why?

Evaluation & Ethics

7. To what extent should sports organizations be responsible for the social consequences of betting promotion?

8. Is it ethical to advertise betting during live sports events that attract young audiences?

9. Where should the line be drawn between personal responsibility and corporate responsibility?

Debate & Opinion

10. Has sports betting enhanced or damaged the sports viewing experience? Support your answer.

11. Should betting be treated primarily as entertainment or as a public health issue?

12. Do you agree that constant monetization threatens the cultural value of sports?

Reflection & Extension

13. Can you think of another industry where entertainment and gambling-like mechanisms overlap?

14. How might sports betting evolve in the next ten years if current trends continue?

15. What regulations, if any, would you propose to reduce potential harm without banning betting altogether?

📘 CLASS:

Why Billionaires Are Building “Doomsday” Bunkers

Level: Upper & Lower Intermediate (with two reading versions)

Skills: Reading comprehension, vocabulary, discussion, critical thinking

Theme: Fear, risk, survival, psychology, society & inequality

📗 Reading Text —

Upper Intermediate

Why Are Billionaires Building Bunkers?

In recent years, many ultra-wealthy people have invested in underground bunkers and secure shelters. These are not just simple basements — they are often self-sufficient structures with food storage, independent energy systems, medical facilities, and high-tech security.

There are several reasons why billionaires may build these shelters. First, concerns about global catastrophes — including climate change, natural disasters, pandemics, economic collapse, or war — make survival planning attractive. Many fear that critical systems like food supply, electricity, and civil order may fail in crisis situations.

Some experts say that access to advanced risk analyses and private data encourages the rich to prepare, even when the average person sees little immediate threat. For example, geopolitical instability or cyber-attacks on global infrastructure are possibilities that may seem more urgent to people connected to global finance and technology.

Another factor is psychological comfort. Extreme wealth can amplify anxiety about losing a way of life. A shelter — especially one with luxury features — may act as a form of insurance and peace of mind. Critics argue that this trend reflects individualism and inequality, as wealthy people focus on personal survival rather than collective solutions.

Finally, for some billionaires it is not only about survival, but also about status. Owning an elaborate doomsday bunker can signal power and exclusivity, cementing social identity among the ultra-rich.

Vocabulary

Match the words with their definitions:

1. Self-sufficient

2. Catastrophe

3. Infrastructure

4. Psychological comfort

5. Inequality

6. Status

a. Systems and structures (like energy, communication) that support society

b. The feeling of security or relief

c. Ability to live independently without outside help

d. Great difference in access or wealth

e. A large disaster or dangerous situation

f. Social position or rank

Comprehension Questions

A) Multiple-Choice (choose one):

1. Why do many billionaires invest in bunkers?
   a) To save money
   b) Because they fear future disasters
   c) To hide from their workers
   d) For entertainment

2. What does self-sufficient most nearly mean?
   a) Needing many people
   b) Living independently
   c) Always online
   d) Very small

3. Which of the following is NOT mentioned as a possible threat?
   a) Pandemics
   b) Economic collapse
   c) Alien invasion
   d) Cyber-attacks

B) Short Answer:

4. Why might access to private data influence billionaire decision-making?

5. What do critics say about the focus on individual survival rather than collective solutions?

Discussion / Speaking Prompts

1. Do you think building a bunker makes sense if disasters happen? Why or why not?

2. Can money protect people from real crises? Explain.

3. What would you do if you had unlimited resources and knew a global crisis was coming?

📝 Writing Tasks (Upper & Lower)

Upper: Write a paragraph (100–120 words) about whether building bunkers is a good way to prepare for future problems. Use at least three reasons from the reading.

Lower: Write 4–6 sentences about what you think about bunkers. Do you worry about disasters? Why or why not?

🎤 Self-Introduction for Japanese Managers

Guidelines for a Clear, Confident & Respectful Presentation

🎯 Main goal

To introduce yourself professionally, clearly, and respectfully, showing:

• Who you are

• What you do well

• How you work

• How you want to grow with the company

1️⃣ Opening: Polite, calm, and respectful 🌸

In Japanese business culture, first impressions = tone + respect.

👉 Encourage her to:

• Speak slowly

• Smile softly

• Avoid sounding too casual or overly confident

Useful opening phrases:

• Good morning. Thank you very much for this opportunity.

• It’s a pleasure to introduce myself today.

• I truly appreciate your time.

🧠 Teaching tip:

Explain that gratitude first = professionalism, not weakness.

2️⃣ Who I am & my role 🧩

Keep it simple and factual. No exaggeration.

Model structure:

• Name

• Current position

• Area of responsibility

Example:

My name is ___, and I currently work as ___.

My main responsibilities include ___ and ___.

🚫 Avoid:

• “I’m amazing at…”

• “I’m the best person for…”

✅ Prefer:

• “I’m responsible for…”

• “I work mainly with…”

3️⃣ Skills: Show competence with humility 🎓

In Japanese culture, confidence is shown through clarity, not self-promotion.

🛠 How to present skills:

Use evidence + usefulness, not ego.

Useful phrases:

• I have experience in…

• I’ve been developing my skills in…

• I’m particularly focused on improving…

Example:

I have experience working with international teams, which has helped me improve my communication and adaptability.

🧠 Teaching tip:

Highlight verbs like develop, improve, contribute, support.

4️⃣ Work style & environment 🌱

This part is VERY important for Japanese managers.

They value:

• Teamwork 🤝

• Discipline ⏰

• Learning mindset 📈

Good phrases:

• I value teamwork and clear communication.

• I’m comfortable working in structured environments.

• I respect processes and deadlines.

Example:

I work well in organized environments and I appreciate clear guidelines and collaboration.

5️⃣ Growth mindset: The key section 🌸

Japanese leadership LOVES hearing about long-term growth.

Focus on:

• Learning

• Commitment

• Loyalty to the company’s development

Strong phrases:

• I’m eager to continue learning within the company.

• I see this role as a long-term opportunity to grow.

• I’m motivated to develop my skills and contribute more over time.

Example:

I’m very motivated to grow professionally within the company and to continuously improve my skills.

6️⃣ Closing: Respectful and thankful 🙏

End with gratitude + openness.

Good closing lines:

• Thank you very much for listening.

• I appreciate your guidance and support.

• I look forward to learning from you.

🧠 Teaching tip:

Explain that ending softly is stronger than ending boldly in this context.

⚠️ Cultural Language Tips for Japanese Audiences

✅ Do:

• Be clear and structured

• Use modest language

• Emphasize learning and contribution

🚫 Avoid:

• Overconfidence

• Humor or irony

• Informal expressions

✨ Think: calm, respectful, reliable.

🎓 60-Minute High-Intermediate Lesson Plan

🎥 Topic: Smart Glasses, Covert Filming & Digital Exploitation

Level: B2

Skills: Reading • Speaking • Critical Thinking • Vocabulary in Context

Focus: Privacy • Ethics • Gender • Technology

🎯 Learning Objectives

By the end of the lesson, students will:

✅ Understand a complex news-based text

✅ Infer meaning from context

✅ Use advanced vocabulary related to privacy and technology

✅ Express nuanced opinions using structured argumentation

⏱️ Lesson Structure (60 Minutes)

🔥 1️⃣ Lead-in Discussion (8–10 minutes)

Write on the board:

“If you are in a public place, you should expect to be filmed.”

Students discuss in pairs:

• Do you agree or disagree?

• Does being in public mean giving up privacy?

• Is there a difference between filming a crowd and focusing on one person?

Elicit useful expressions:

✨ I partially agree because…

✨ It depends on…

✨ From a legal perspective…

✨ Morally speaking…

📰 2️⃣ Reading (15–20 minutes)

🎥 When “Walking Tours” Become Surveillance

A recent investigation by BBC News has revealed a disturbing trend in major cities around the world. Videos presented online as “walking tours” — which appear to show nightlife, architecture, and urban culture — are often heavily focused on women’s bodies rather than the city itself.

These videos are typically filmed in busy nightlife districts filled with bars, restaurants, and nightclubs. The camera frequently follows women wearing dresses or skirts, sometimes recording from low or intrusive angles. Critics argue that although the videos are marketed as tourism content, their true intention is voyeuristic and exploitative.

Some recordings are made using smart glasses produced by Meta. These wearable devices allow users to record hands-free while appearing to simply wear normal glasses. The company states that a small light activates whenever recording begins. However, investigators found that the light can be covered or disabled, making covert recording possible.

Several women reported being approached by men who appeared to be casually flirting or starting conversations. In some cases, the men were “hitting on” them while secretly recording the interaction. The women later discovered that the footage had been uploaded online and monetized without their consent.

In addition to the violation of privacy, some victims experienced online harassment. After the videos were posted, anonymous users left offensive comments — a behavior commonly known as trolling. This digital harassment intensified the emotional harm.

Legally, the issue is complex. In many countries, filming in public spaces is not automatically illegal. However, recording someone in a way that focuses on their body without consent may violate privacy or harassment laws. Experts warn that technology is advancing faster than legislation, creating grey areas in enforcement.

The controversy raises broader questions about digital ethics, gender power dynamics, and corporate responsibility. Should wearable technology be more strictly regulated? Or does responsibility lie solely with the individual user?

📌 3️⃣ Reading Tasks (10–12 minutes)

✅ Task 1: Gist

In one sentence, summarize the main problem described in the text.

🔎 Task 2: Detail Questions

1️⃣ Why are the videos misleading?

2️⃣ What makes the smart glasses controversial?

3️⃣ How are women approached before being recorded?

4️⃣ Why is the legal situation described as a “grey area”?

🧠 Task 3: Vocabulary in Context

Find words in the text that mean:

1️⃣ Secretly → __________

2️⃣ Recorded material → __________

3️⃣ Permission → __________

4️⃣ Unfair use for benefit → __________

5️⃣ Offensive online comments → __________

()

📚 4️⃣ Vocabulary Practice (10 minutes)

✍️ Fill in the Gaps

Use: covert, consent, exploitation, footage, trolling

1️⃣ The man was accused of ______ recording.

2️⃣ The uploaded ______ generated advertising revenue.

3️⃣ Recording someone without ______ can be illegal.

4️⃣ Many activists called it digital ______.

5️⃣ Online ______ increased the victim’s distress.

💬 Discussion with Vocabulary

Students must answer using at least TWO vocabulary words:

• Does covert filming always equal exploitation?

• Can trolling be as harmful as the original act?

🧠 5️⃣ Critical Discussion (10–12 minutes)

Divide into small groups.

Debate Prompts

⚖️ Should filming in public be legally restricted?

📱 Should tech companies like Meta be responsible for misuse?

👩 Is this primarily a gender issue or a tech issue?

💰 Does monetization make the situation more serious?

Encourage structured argument:

➡️ On the one hand…

➡️ On the other hand…

➡️ Furthermore…

➡️ Nevertheless…

➡️ This raises the question of…

🎭 6️⃣ Role-Play (Optional if time allows)

Choose a role:

🎤 Journalist interviewing a tech spokesperson

👩 Woman who discovered she was filmed

⚖️ Lawmaker proposing new regulation

💻 Technology company representative

🏠 Homework (Optional)

Write 250 words:

“Is digital privacy disappearing in modern society?”

Include:

✅ 5 vocabulary words

✅ One counterargument

✅ One real-world example

Answers: covert, footage, consent, exploitation, trolling