Unit 2 Language and Mind-Reading B-Critical Thinking 教案-2025-2026学年高中英语沪外版选择性必修第二册

Unit 2 Language and Mind-Reading B-Critical Thinking 教学目标和重难点 教学目标 Language Competence: Enable students to master core vocabulary and complex sentence structures related to language and mind, and improve abilities to understand, analyze and express views on the text’s theme in English. Cultural Awareness: Guide students to perceive the connection between language and cultural thinking, respect cultural diversity and establish a rational cultural perspective. Thinking Quality: Cultivate students’ critical thinking ability to question, analyze, evaluate and infer the text’s views and logical relations. Learning Ability: Help students master effective reading and critical thinking strategies, and develop autonomous, cooperative and inquisitive learning habits. 教学重难点 Key Points: Master the core vocabulary and sentence patterns in Reading B, understand the text’s main idea, structure and the author’s views on the relationship between language and mind; grasp the basic methods of critical thinking in English reading. Difficult Points: Apply critical thinking to analyze and evaluate the author’s arguments and logical reasoning; express personal views and critical opinions in fluent and accurate English combined with the text. 教学过程 Step 1: Lead-in (Lead-in and Activation) The teacher starts the class with an open-ended question: “Do you think the language we speak affects the way we think? For example, if we use different words to describe the same object, will our understanding of it change?” Then, the teacher shows two simple examples: in English, there are separate words for “aunt” and “uncle” to distinguish different relatives, while in some languages, there is only one word for all aunts and uncles; in some languages, there are more words to describe colors than in others. The teacher invites 3-4 students to share their views freely in English, and encourages them to express their initial thoughts without worrying about grammatical mistakes. After the students’ sharing, the teacher summarizes: “Our language is closely related to our thinking, and this is exactly the core topic of Reading B we will learn today. In this class, we will not only understand the author’s views on the relationship between language and mind, but also learn to think critically, question and evaluate the views in the text. Let’s start our exploration.” Design Intention: The lead-in links the text theme with students’ daily life, which is easy to arouse students’ interest and enthusiasm for participation. The open-ended questions and simple examples lower the threshold of expression, help students activate their existing knowledge and experience about language and thinking, and lay a foundation for the subsequent reading and critical thinking training. At the same time, it clearly points out the core task of this class — critical thinking, so that students can have a clear learning goal from the beginning. Step 2: Pre-reading (Vocabulary and Background Preview) First, the teacher presents the core vocabulary and phrases in Reading B, including critical thinking, cognitive ability, shape perception, linguistic relativity, argument, evidence, logical reasoning, evaluate, infer, challenge, etc. For each word and phrase, the teacher does not simply explain the definition, but combines simple sentences and context related to the text theme to help students understand and memorize. For example, when explaining “linguistic relativity”, the teacher says: “Linguistic relativity is the idea that the language we speak influences our thinking and perception of the world, which is one of the key views discussed in the text.” For “critical thinking”, the teacher explains: “Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally, to question and evaluate information rather than accept it blindly.” Then, the teacher briefly introduces the background of the text: Reading B mainly discusses the relationship between language and mind, introduces different views on linguistic relativity, and provides relevant evidence and arguments. The teacher reminds students: “When reading, we should not only understand what the author says, but also pay attention to how the author supports his views, whether the evidence is sufficient, and whether the logical reasoning is reasonable — this is the key of critical thinking.” Finally, the teacher arranges a short group discussion: “Based on the vocabulary and background we just learned, predict what content the text may involve. What questions do you want to ask about the relationship between language and mind?” Each group discusses for a few minutes, and then sends a representative to share their predictions and questions. The teacher writes down the key questions on the blackboard, such as “What is the author’s attitude towards linguistic relativity?” “What evidence does the author use to support his views?” Design Intention: Pre-reading vocabulary preview helps students eliminate language obstacles in reading, so that they can focus more on understanding the text content and thinking about the theme. Combining the text theme to explain vocabulary can help students connect vocabulary with the text context, improve the efficiency of vocabulary learning and application. Background introduction enables students to have a preliminary understanding of the text’s core content, and group prediction and question raising can stimulate students’ reading motivation and sense of inquiry, and lay a foundation for the subsequent critical reading. Step 3: While-reading (Reading and Critical Analysis) This step is divided into three parts: skimming, scanning and intensive reading, which gradually guides students to understand the text and carry out critical thinking training. Skimming: Grasp the Main Idea The teacher asks students to read the text quickly, and complete two tasks: Find out the main idea of the text; Divide the text into several parts and summarize the main content of each part. After reading, students complete the tasks independently first, then exchange ideas in pairs, and finally the teacher invites several students to share their answers and summarizes them. The main idea of the text: The text discusses the relationship between language and mind, introduces the theory of linguistic relativity, presents different arguments and evidence for and against this theory, and finally puts forward that we should view the relationship between language and mind from a critical perspective. The text can be divided into three parts: Part 1 (Paragraph 1-2): Introduce the topic of the relationship between language and mind and the basic concept of linguistic relativity; Part 2 (Paragraph 3-5): Present the supporting evidence and opposing views of linguistic relativity; Part 3 (Paragraph 6): Summarize that we should view the relationship between language and mind critically. Design Intention: Skimming training helps students master the reading strategy of grasping the main idea quickly, which is the basis of critical reading. Dividing the text and summarizing the main content of each part can help students sort out the text structure, understand the logical connection between each part, and lay a foundation for the subsequent analysis of the author’s arguments and reasoning. Scanning: Locate Key Information The teacher arranges scanning tasks for students: Find out the supporting evidence of linguistic relativity mentioned in the text; Find out the opposing views and their reasons; Mark the key sentences that reflect the author’s attitude. Students read the text again, locate the relevant information according to the tasks, and take notes. Then, the teacher organizes the whole class to exchange and sort out the information, and writes it on the blackboard in the form of a table for students to refer to. Views Evidence/Reasons Supporting linguistic relativity 1. Speakers of different languages have different perceptions of time and space; 2. Some languages have more detailed words for colors, and speakers of these languages can distinguish colors more accurately; 3. The structure of language affects people’s logical thinking. Opposing linguistic relativity 1. Many cognitive abilities are innate, not affected by language; 2. The differences in language do not lead to fundamental differences in thinking; 3. The evidence supporting linguistic relativity is not sufficient and lacks universality. After sorting out the information, the teacher asks: “After finding these key information, do you have any questions? For example, is the evidence supporting linguistic relativity convincing? Are the opposing reasons reasonable?” Guide students to start thinking critically initially. Design Intention: Scanning training helps students master the strategy of locating key information quickly, which is the basis for analyzing and evaluating the text. Sorting out the supporting evidence and opposing views in the form of a table makes the information more intuitive and clear, which is convenient for students to compare and analyze. The teacher’s guiding questions can stimulate students’ critical awareness and guide them to move from “understanding information” to “analyzing information”. Intensive Reading: Analyze and Evaluate The teacher guides students to read the text intensively paragraph by paragraph, focusing on analyzing the author’s argumentation logic, evidence validity and attitude, and carries out critical thinking training through a series of guiding questions. For Paragraph 1-2 (Introduction of the topic and linguistic relativity): The teacher asks: “How does the author introduce the topic? What is the definition of linguistic relativity given by the author? Is the definition clear and accurate? Do you have any different understanding of linguistic relativity?” Students discuss in groups, and then share their views. The teacher comments: “The author introduces the topic by raising questions, which is vivid and can arouse readers’ interest. The definition of linguistic relativity is clear, pointing out the core relationship between language and thinking. However, we can also think: is linguistic relativity a universal law? Are there any exceptions?” For Paragraph 3-5 (Supporting evidence and opposing views): The teacher asks a series of critical questions: What evidence does the author use to support linguistic relativity? Is this evidence specific and convincing? Can you find any loopholes in the evidence? What are the opposing views? Do the opponents put forward sufficient reasons and evidence? Does the author treat the two views fairly? Is there any bias in the description? For example, when introducing the supporting evidence, does the author overstate its role? When introducing the opposing views, does the author ignore some reasonable points? Students are arranged to discuss these questions in groups of 4-5. Each group is responsible for analyzing one part of the evidence or views, and then sends a representative to present the group’s analysis results. For example, some groups may point out: “The evidence that ‘speakers of different languages have different perceptions of time and space’ is specific, but it only takes a few languages as examples, which may not be universal.” Some groups may think: “The author treats both views fairly, introducing both supporting and opposing evidence, without obvious bias.” The teacher affirms the reasonable views of the students, and guides them to think further: “If we want to verify whether linguistic relativity is correct, what other evidence can we find? What research methods can we use?” For Paragraph 6 (Conclusion): The teacher asks: “What is the author’s final view? How does the author summarize the previous arguments? Is the author’s conclusion reasonable and logical? Do you agree with the author’s view that we should view the relationship between language and mind from a critical perspective? Why?” Students express their views freely, and the teacher guides them to combine their own life experience and knowledge to explain their reasons. For example, some students may agree: “Because different views have their own rationality, we can’t accept one view blindly, but should analyze and judge objectively.” Some students may put forward different views: “I think linguistic relativity has a certain rationality, but the author’s conclusion is too vague, and it does not clearly point out the extent to which language affects thinking.” In the process of intensive reading, the teacher pays attention to guiding students to use English to express their critical views, corrects their grammatical mistakes and inappropriate expressions in time, and helps them improve their ability of English expression. At the same time, the teacher emphasizes the key points of critical thinking: questioning, analyzing, evaluating and inferring, and guides students to form a rational thinking mode, instead of accepting the author’s views blindly. Design Intention: Intensive reading is the core link of critical thinking training. Through targeted guiding questions, students are guided to analyze the author’s argumentation logic, evidence validity and attitude in depth, which helps students master the methods of critical reading. Group discussion can stimulate students’ thinking collision, let students learn from each other, and improve their ability of cooperative learning and critical thinking. Guiding students to combine their own experience to express views can connect the text with real life, deepen their understanding of the theme, and improve their ability of English expression and critical thinking application. Step 4: Post-reading (Application and Extension) This step is mainly to help students consolidate the knowledge and skills learned, apply critical thinking to practice, and expand their thinking and vision. Vocabulary and Sentence Pattern Consolidation The teacher arranges a vocabulary and sentence pattern exercise: Complete the sentences with the core vocabulary and phrases learned in the class; Rewrite the key sentences in the text with your own words, and try to use complex sentence structures such as attributive clauses and adverbial clauses. After students complete the exercises independently, the teacher checks and comments, focuses on correcting common mistakes, and guides students to use vocabulary and sentence patterns flexibly. For example, the sentences for exercise: We should use ________ (critical thinking) to evaluate the author’s views. The author ________ (presents) a lot of evidence to support his argument. The relationship between language and mind is very complex, so we should view it ________ (critically). Design Intention: Vocabulary and sentence pattern consolidation is the basis for improving students’ language ability. Through exercises, students can consolidate the core vocabulary and sentence patterns learned, and improve their ability of language application, which provides a guarantee for the subsequent expression of critical views. Critical Thinking Practice The teacher arranges a group debate activity: Divide the class into two groups, Group A supports linguistic relativity, and Group B opposes linguistic relativity. Each group uses the evidence and arguments in the text and their own life experience, knowledge to prepare for the debate. The debate topics are: “Does language determine thinking?” The debate process includes opening statement, free debate and closing statement. Each group has 3-4 minutes for opening statement and closing statement, and 10-12 minutes for free debate. During the debate, the teacher requires students to use English to express their views, focus on the logic and evidence of the argument, and encourage students to question and refute the opposing views rationally. After the debate, the teacher comments on the performance of both groups, affirms the advantages of each group (such as sufficient evidence, clear logic, fluent expression), points out the deficiencies (such as insufficient evidence, unclear logic, inappropriate expression), and summarizes: “Through the debate, we can find that both views have their own rationality and limitations. Language does have a certain impact on thinking, but it does not determine thinking. The key is that we should view this relationship from a critical perspective, not be limited by a single view.” Design Intention: Debate is an effective way to train students’ critical thinking and English expression ability. Through the debate, students can apply the critical thinking methods learned in the class to practice, improve their ability of analyzing and evaluating problems, and at the same time improve their fluency and accuracy of English expression. The teacher’s comment helps students sort out their thinking, deepen their understanding of the theme, and further consolidate the critical thinking ability. Theme Extension The teacher guides students to expand the theme: “Combined with our own experience, think about how the Chinese language and English affect our thinking differently? For example, in terms of expression habits, logical thinking, etc. Do you think these differences will affect our cross-cultural communication? How should we deal with them?” Students discuss in groups, and then share their views. For example, some students may say: “Chinese pays more attention to implicit expression, while English pays more attention to explicit expression, which affects our way of thinking and communication. In cross-cultural communication, we should understand these differences and adjust our expression way to avoid misunderstandings.” Some students may point out: “The differences between Chinese and English in grammar and vocabulary also affect our thinking. For example, English has tense changes, which makes us pay more attention to the time of things, while Chinese does not have obvious tense changes, which makes us pay more attention to the overall meaning.” After the students’ sharing, the teacher summarizes: “Language and thinking are closely related, and the differences between different languages will lead to differences in thinking mode. In cross-cultural communication, we should respect these differences, understand the connection between language and cultural thinking, and use critical thinking to view and deal with these differences, so as to improve our cross-cultural communication ability.” Design Intention: Theme extension connects the text with students’ cross-cultural communication experience, which helps students expand their thinking vision, deepen their understanding of the relationship between language and mind, and at the same time cultivate their cultural awareness and cross-cultural communication ability. It also enables students to apply critical thinking to real-life problems, realizing the transfer and application of knowledge and skills. Step 5:Summary The teacher invites students to summarize what they have learned in this class, including the core content of the text, the methods of critical thinking, the key vocabulary and sentence patterns. Then, the teacher makes a final summary: “In this class, we learned about the relationship between language and mind through Reading B, mastered the core vocabulary and sentence patterns related to the theme, and more importantly, learned to use critical thinking to analyze and evaluate the author’s views. Critical thinking is a very important ability, which can help us view problems more rationally and objectively, not only in English reading, but also in our daily study and life. We should continue to practice and improve this ability.” Design Intention: Letting students summarize what they have learned can help them sort out the knowledge system, deepen their memory and understanding of the knowledge and skills learned. The teacher’s final summary emphasizes the importance of critical thinking, which helps students establish a correct learning concept and lay a foundation for their long-term development. 1 / 1 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $