Listen for pros and cons · Think with clear numbers · Speak with evidence from the video
Which three ways did you see? Watch once, then tap the ways you caught.
In telemedicine, is there still a doctor?
Do the patient and the doctor need to be in the same place?
The topic is telemedicine. Which aspects of “telemedicine vs. an in-person visit” might the video mention? We seeded one — commuting.
Your turn: add one or two aspects of your own (up to four if you want a challenge).
Go back to ③. For each aspect, mark it: the video mentioned it · it did not · ? you are not sure.
Read each sentence, choose T or F, then check and read the evidence.
After one viewing: what is the first half of the video mainly about?
Lin has a headache. She searches online and finds two different explanations. Then she asks an AI chatbot — and gets a third one.
All three sound confident. Before trusting any of them, what could she check?
Is medical information on websites generally reliable?
Lin asks an AI chatbot to diagnose her headache. Is that generally reliable?
Two conditional questions — count them one by one.
P1. Will the Saudi study figures be the same as our class, higher, or lower?
P2. What is the speaker's conclusion — and why does he believe it?
In one study in Saudi Arabia, people said they use the internet to check symptoms — but how many believed it was reliable?
You wrote a prediction in ⑤. Now that you've watched: what does the speaker conclude, and what reason did you hear? Write it yourself first — then check the reference.
These are not the same kind of thing. Tap a card, then tap the column it belongs to.
For each source, write one benefit (good point) and one limitation (bad point). Then label each idea: “in the video” or “my inference” (my own reasonable guess).
Everyone speaks: 30 seconds to prepare alone → A speaks 45 seconds, B notes the evidence → swap roles → both revise → two students share with the class.
Use the evidence frames. You may say “I think … because the video says …” — the reason is the point.
Which resource first, which next, and when to move on? Any order is fine — if you can give a reason. (Going straight to a doctor is also allowed.)
Score yourself or your partner on each line — 1 (just starting) to 4 (secure).
One sentence, English: how will you combine these resources to stay reliable without wasting effort?
Imagine Lin's cousin (fictional): a headache for two days, and two different explanations online. Make him a small information-check card with four lines:
整份课件是「一次一环节」的翻页形态:底部分页器点圆点直达、左右箭头翻页;键盘 ← → 与 PageUp / PageDown(翻页笔默认发这四个键)翻页,Home / End 直达首末环节。翻到哪一页,刷新后仍停在那页;地址栏 ?p=4 就是第④环节,可直接发给学生。离页即停:翻走时该页正在播的视频会自动暂停。封面页保留大标题,其余页收起头图把版面让给内容;教师折叠条只在第⑧页出现。
| 分钟 | 环节 | 学生动作 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–3:00 | 听写①(滚动:上单元核心词句) | 嵌入式常规 |
| 3:00–6:00 | ① 医院场景核心路径(3′ 到点收束) | 选角色→3 空间 5W→词网→pair share |
| 6:00–9:00 | ② 新介绍片(38″ 单遍)+ 三方式核对 + 1 道概念判定 | 看片→点选→判定 |
| 9:00–11:00 | ③ 预测(A2 写 1–2 项) | 自拟 aspect |
| 11:00–18:30 | ④ 前半段 + gist 主旨 + T/F①②(错题可回放) | 看 seg1→作答→核对 |
| 18:30–23:30 | ⑤ 虚构情境 + 两问投票 + 条件题 + 两预测 | 个人投票+班级计数 |
| 23:30–31:30 | ⑥ 后半段 + T/F③④ + 数字 + 结论先写后揭 | 看 seg2→作答→自揭→修订 |
| 31:30–38:00 | ⑦ 三列分拣 + 四格汇总 + 讨论(A45″/B记→互换) | 人人开口 |
| 38:00–40:00 | ⑧ 退出条 + 信息核查卡作业 | exit ticket |
Tasks x/8 口径:①场景问答卡 ≥2 ②自拟 aspect ≥1 ③T/F①② ④四格笔记 ≥1 ⑤个人投票(A/B 任一)⑥班级条件题 ≥1 ⑦路线任一框 ⑧退出条。七站完整探索与词网编辑模式为课后。
Q1 分母=实到人数;Q2 分母=Q1 中「搜过」的人数(与视频 "65% of them" 同口径)。0 人时学生视图显示 no data yet。
| 题 | 答案 | 证据(原片旁白) |
|---|---|---|
| T/F 1 | T | “no longer required to visit a surgery … advice over the phone or online” |
| T/F 2 | F | “Online consultations take place in the comfort of your home or workplace.” |
| T/F 3 | F | “only 65% of them actually believed online health information to be reliable.”(第 2 半段) |
| T/F 4 | T | “The term 'cyberchondriac' describes someone who compulsively searches the internet for medical information.”(第 2 半段) |
| Saudi | 92 / 65 / 35 | “92% … use the internet to check symptoms … only 65% … believed … reliable … 35% … didn't trust.” |
| Speaker 结论 | “best medical advice … from a qualified medical professional” | 理由:misdiagnosis / dismiss / cyberchondria 焦虑 |
右下角 🟠 支架抽屉三杠杆:Frame(句型开头)/Word bank(4 术语+释义)/Example(示范另一题)。界面不出现层级标签。递减建议:环节④⑤三枚全开 → 环节⑥仅词汇 → 环节⑦全撤。逐姓名建议只在此处,学生侧不可见。左下角「📤 My case file」= 导出学生档案,两种格式:Copy text(复制文本)与 Download JSON(下载结构化 JSON,含量表/四格笔记/退出条全量)。
| 原则 | 本课证据 | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| LP1 Learning Purposes | 真实议题 + 核心问 + AI 使用边界(虚构情境卡) | 1.1 / 1.2 / 1.4 |
| LP3 Evidence of Learning | 预测→验证;咱班数据 vs Saudi;rubric 自评 | 3.1 / 3.3 / 3.4 |
| LP4 Learning Perspectives | 预测被推翻/不确定时诚实修正(4.1 从错误得洞见);随视频新信息调整四格笔记与判断(4.2) | 4.1 / 4.2 |
| LP5 Engagement & Autonomy | 自选 aspects;自建 route;支架自取 | 5.1 / 5.3 |
| LP7 Inclusion, Equity, Belonging | 同题三档入口;每环人人有最低产出 | 7.1 / 7.6 |
| LP2 Dimensions(辅) | 画面+旁白→判断→整合路线的推理链 | 2.1 |
| LP9 Space & Time(辅) | 可反复回看片段、自定笔记节奏(9.2 时间自主) | 9.2 |
| 不承担 LP6 / LP8 / LP10 | 社区研发、治理、长期福祉——单课不可取证 | — |
seg1(0–0:59)/ seg2(0:59–2:29,实测 90.5″,片尾无静音)由 3.mp4 切分、720p 重压;whisper 时间戳逐字稿为唯一内容源,Saudi=92/65/35 与四术语(consultation / misdiagnosis / dismiss / cyberchondriac)均已核对。T/F 四句已按 3E 学生书 p60 Ex 3 原句替换。