Abitur NRW Englisch 2021 · GK · Nachtermin

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist entered the USA illegally by crossing the Mexican border and now stays in a garage he rents. His wife, who is expecting their first child, remained in Mexico. The following passage is taken from the opening of the short story.

Today will be better, Jesus said to himself. He stood confidently along the curb with the

others. It was cold, damn cold. The men huddled close to each other, but not too close. It was

around 6:00 a.m. on a Saturday in November on the outskirts of Fallbrook, California.

“Hey Pancho,” one of the Oaxacans said. “How’s your family?”

5 “ Bien,” another Oaxacan said. “And yours?”

Damn Oaxaqueños, Jesus thought. So many of them.

He took a good look at the lot, trying to see each as they’d be seen by the locals. Only a few

were of average American height. Most were short, dark, and stout. They looked strong,

standing with broad shoulders and barrel chests.

10 Jesus was from Sinaloa, a rugged northern state on the west coast of Mexico. At five-foot-ten,

he was taller than most of the men looking for work. He was a well-built man. His fair

complexion was tinged red from days burned by the sun. Jesus was good with a hammer.

He preferred housing and cement work to landscaping. Landscaping was not his strength.

Of course the Oaxacans were good at everything.

15 The cold air stung at the back of his throat. It was easier to inhale through the nostrils. The

morning sun began to rise above the hill that was behind the workers. Most of the men had

their hands in their jacket pockets. This was one way they sized each other up. Those who

considered themselves better than others stayed still. They didn’t move side-to-side, or put

their hands near their mouths and blow like a maricon, a faggot. They were machos.

20 Jesus daydreamed, remembering the last time he saw his family. It was a beautiful May

morning in Culiacan City. Anxious about the trip north, he didn’t sleep well the night before.

Out of concern, his wife, Celia Maria, didn’t either.

“Here are your eggs with beans,” Celia Maria said. “How many tortillas would you like?”

“Just two, Vieja,” Jesus said, noticing the sadness in her voice. They’d only been married

25 fourteen months. Despite being a recently wed couple, he affectionately called her, Vieja, or

Old Love. […]

Once the cold stopped being a challenge the men moved in place passing the time, staying

limber in case they needed to run. They were in a foreign land and shared a common pain.

Some felt a strain in their hearts, a constant fear of getting caught by la migra. Others felt a

30 throb in their heads, a daily migraine of shame that could only be relieved by the analgesic

of finding work. This was Jesus’ first season away from home, and though he was surrounded

every morning by familiar faces, he was lonely. He longed for a warm embrace from his

Vieja. The sound of an engine coming up the hill snapped Jesus from his pleasant reverie.

The Oaxacans quickly lined up at the edge of the curb, placing themselves in the best spot.

35 Damn me to hell! Jesus thought. These guys are professionals. He ran to where they stood.

The vehicle came closer and closer, eventually passing by. In return for their canine-like

interest, the men got a look of disgust from the elderly man driving the car. Puffed up chests

deflated, and heads dropped several inches. There would be no trabajo for now. Jesus

walked back slowly to his favorite spot near two lush shrubs. The gringos water everything,

40 he said to himself. […]

Jesus sat on the edge of the sidewalk. He looked at his watch again: 2:55 p.m. Some of the

men were leaving, giving up for the day. Only a few hours of daylight remained, the winter

workday cut short by the sun’s early set. Pinches maricones, Jesus thought. They give up

too easily. I’m staying another hour.

45 In six months, Jesus had made more money working in the U.S. than he had the entire

previous year in Mexico. With the money he sent home, Celia Maria was able to buy a crib

and baby clothes. He kept just enough money to feed himself and pay his monthly rent for

the garage.

At 3:15 p.m. Jesus heard the sound of another engine coming up the hill. There were few

50 men left to compete for the curb’s best realty. A double cab Tundra stopped in front of the

men.

“I need a good rooster!” the voice said in Spanish from inside.

“ ¡Aquí está su gallo! ” or “Here is your rooster!” Jesus said, leaping forward. ‘ El mejor

gallo de Culiacan, Sinaloa. ’

55 Some men let out a howl while others laughed.

“Okay, you,” the man said, appreciating Jesus’ pride. “Get inside.”

Jesus didn’t hesitate. Quickly he grabbed the handle and opened the door. Once inside he

felt an inner peace deep down to his bones, and his muscles relaxed.

Annotations:

4, 6 · Oaxacans / Oaxaqueños ( Spanish) – people from Oaxaca, a state in the south-west of Mexico

29 · la migra ( Spanish, slang) – the US-American immigration offices or the border patrol

38 · trabajo ( Spanish) – work

43 · pinches maricones ( Spanish, derogative) – here used as a swearword undermining the Oaxacans’ masculinity

50 · realty – property in the form of land or building; valuable space

50 · double cab Tundra – type of pickup truck

53 · gallo ( Spanish) – rooster; in Latin America also: strong man

53–54 · El mejor gallo de Culiacan… ( Spanish) – The best rooster of Culiacan…

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

1. Outline how the extract portrays the situation of undocumented migrant workers in the USA.

(Comprehension) [12 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist entered the USA illegally by crossing the Mexican border and now stays in a garage he rents. His wife, who is expecting their first child, remained in Mexico. The following passage is taken from the opening of the short story.

Today will be better, Jesus said to himself. He stood confidently along the curb with the

others. It was cold, damn cold. The men huddled close to each other, but not too close. It was

around 6:00 a.m. on a Saturday in November on the outskirts of Fallbrook, California.

“Hey Pancho,” one of the Oaxacans said. “How’s your family?”

5 “ Bien,” another Oaxacan said. “And yours?”

Damn Oaxaqueños, Jesus thought. So many of them.

He took a good look at the lot, trying to see each as they’d be seen by the locals. Only a few

were of average American height. Most were short, dark, and stout. They looked strong,

standing with broad shoulders and barrel chests.

10 Jesus was from Sinaloa, a rugged northern state on the west coast of Mexico. At five-foot-ten,

he was taller than most of the men looking for work. He was a well-built man. His fair

complexion was tinged red from days burned by the sun. Jesus was good with a hammer.

He preferred housing and cement work to landscaping. Landscaping was not his strength.

Of course the Oaxacans were good at everything.

15 The cold air stung at the back of his throat. It was easier to inhale through the nostrils. The

morning sun began to rise above the hill that was behind the workers. Most of the men had

their hands in their jacket pockets. This was one way they sized each other up. Those who

considered themselves better than others stayed still. They didn’t move side-to-side, or put

their hands near their mouths and blow like a maricon, a faggot. They were machos.

20 Jesus daydreamed, remembering the last time he saw his family. It was a beautiful May

morning in Culiacan City. Anxious about the trip north, he didn’t sleep well the night before.

Out of concern, his wife, Celia Maria, didn’t either.

“Here are your eggs with beans,” Celia Maria said. “How many tortillas would you like?”

“Just two, Vieja,” Jesus said, noticing the sadness in her voice. They’d only been married

25 fourteen months. Despite being a recently wed couple, he affectionately called her, Vieja, or

Old Love. […]

Once the cold stopped being a challenge the men moved in place passing the time, staying

limber in case they needed to run. They were in a foreign land and shared a common pain.

Some felt a strain in their hearts, a constant fear of getting caught by la migra. Others felt a

30 throb in their heads, a daily migraine of shame that could only be relieved by the analgesic

of finding work. This was Jesus’ first season away from home, and though he was surrounded

every morning by familiar faces, he was lonely. He longed for a warm embrace from his

Vieja. The sound of an engine coming up the hill snapped Jesus from his pleasant reverie.

The Oaxacans quickly lined up at the edge of the curb, placing themselves in the best spot.

35 Damn me to hell! Jesus thought. These guys are professionals. He ran to where they stood.

The vehicle came closer and closer, eventually passing by. In return for their canine-like

interest, the men got a look of disgust from the elderly man driving the car. Puffed up chests

deflated, and heads dropped several inches. There would be no trabajo for now. Jesus

walked back slowly to his favorite spot near two lush shrubs. The gringos water everything,

40 he said to himself. […]

Jesus sat on the edge of the sidewalk. He looked at his watch again: 2:55 p.m. Some of the

men were leaving, giving up for the day. Only a few hours of daylight remained, the winter

workday cut short by the sun’s early set. Pinches maricones, Jesus thought. They give up

too easily. I’m staying another hour.

45 In six months, Jesus had made more money working in the U.S. than he had the entire

previous year in Mexico. With the money he sent home, Celia Maria was able to buy a crib

and baby clothes. He kept just enough money to feed himself and pay his monthly rent for

the garage.

At 3:15 p.m. Jesus heard the sound of another engine coming up the hill. There were few

50 men left to compete for the curb’s best realty. A double cab Tundra stopped in front of the

men.

“I need a good rooster!” the voice said in Spanish from inside.

“ ¡Aquí está su gallo! ” or “Here is your rooster!” Jesus said, leaping forward. ‘ El mejor

gallo de Culiacan, Sinaloa. ’

55 Some men let out a howl while others laughed.

“Okay, you,” the man said, appreciating Jesus’ pride. “Get inside.”

Jesus didn’t hesitate. Quickly he grabbed the handle and opened the door. Once inside he

felt an inner peace deep down to his bones, and his muscles relaxed.

Annotations:

4, 6 · Oaxacans / Oaxaqueños ( Spanish) – people from Oaxaca, a state in the south-west of Mexico

29 · la migra ( Spanish, slang) – the US-American immigration offices or the border patrol

38 · trabajo ( Spanish) – work

43 · pinches maricones ( Spanish, derogative) – here used as a swearword undermining the Oaxacans’ masculinity

50 · realty – property in the form of land or building; valuable space

50 · double cab Tundra – type of pickup truck

53 · gallo ( Spanish) – rooster; in Latin America also: strong man

53–54 · El mejor gallo de Culiacan… ( Spanish) – The best rooster of Culiacan…

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

2. Analyse how the protagonist and his situation are depicted to the reader. Focus on the point of view and the use of language.

(Analysis) [16 Punkte]

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

3.1

In May 2019, the then President Donald Trump presented his administration's new plan on immigration, which "achieves two critical goals. First, it stops illegal immigration and fully secures the border. And, second, it establishes a new legal immigration system that [...] attracts the best and brightest from all around the world." 1 Comment on this plan in light of the social realities in the USA. Draw on what you have covered in class about the American Dream and globalisation.

(Evaluation: comment)

(14 Punkte)

1 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-modernizing-immigration-system-stronger-america/?utm_source=ods&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1600d (Zugriff: 22.05.2020)

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist entered the USA illegally by crossing the Mexican border and now stays in a garage he rents. His wife, who is expecting their first child, remained in Mexico. The following passage is taken from the opening of the short story.

Today will be better, Jesus said to himself. He stood confidently along the curb with the

others. It was cold, damn cold. The men huddled close to each other, but not too close. It was

around 6:00 a.m. on a Saturday in November on the outskirts of Fallbrook, California.

“Hey Pancho,” one of the Oaxacans said. “How’s your family?”

5 “ Bien,” another Oaxacan said. “And yours?”

Damn Oaxaqueños, Jesus thought. So many of them.

He took a good look at the lot, trying to see each as they’d be seen by the locals. Only a few

were of average American height. Most were short, dark, and stout. They looked strong,

standing with broad shoulders and barrel chests.

10 Jesus was from Sinaloa, a rugged northern state on the west coast of Mexico. At five-foot-ten,

he was taller than most of the men looking for work. He was a well-built man. His fair

complexion was tinged red from days burned by the sun. Jesus was good with a hammer.

He preferred housing and cement work to landscaping. Landscaping was not his strength.

Of course the Oaxacans were good at everything.

15 The cold air stung at the back of his throat. It was easier to inhale through the nostrils. The

morning sun began to rise above the hill that was behind the workers. Most of the men had

their hands in their jacket pockets. This was one way they sized each other up. Those who

considered themselves better than others stayed still. They didn’t move side-to-side, or put

their hands near their mouths and blow like a maricon, a faggot. They were machos.

20 Jesus daydreamed, remembering the last time he saw his family. It was a beautiful May

morning in Culiacan City. Anxious about the trip north, he didn’t sleep well the night before.

Out of concern, his wife, Celia Maria, didn’t either.

“Here are your eggs with beans,” Celia Maria said. “How many tortillas would you like?”

“Just two, Vieja,” Jesus said, noticing the sadness in her voice. They’d only been married

25 fourteen months. Despite being a recently wed couple, he affectionately called her, Vieja, or

Old Love. […]

Once the cold stopped being a challenge the men moved in place passing the time, staying

limber in case they needed to run. They were in a foreign land and shared a common pain.

Some felt a strain in their hearts, a constant fear of getting caught by la migra. Others felt a

30 throb in their heads, a daily migraine of shame that could only be relieved by the analgesic

of finding work. This was Jesus’ first season away from home, and though he was surrounded

every morning by familiar faces, he was lonely. He longed for a warm embrace from his

Vieja. The sound of an engine coming up the hill snapped Jesus from his pleasant reverie.

The Oaxacans quickly lined up at the edge of the curb, placing themselves in the best spot.

35 Damn me to hell! Jesus thought. These guys are professionals. He ran to where they stood.

The vehicle came closer and closer, eventually passing by. In return for their canine-like

interest, the men got a look of disgust from the elderly man driving the car. Puffed up chests

deflated, and heads dropped several inches. There would be no trabajo for now. Jesus

walked back slowly to his favorite spot near two lush shrubs. The gringos water everything,

40 he said to himself. […]

Jesus sat on the edge of the sidewalk. He looked at his watch again: 2:55 p.m. Some of the

men were leaving, giving up for the day. Only a few hours of daylight remained, the winter

workday cut short by the sun’s early set. Pinches maricones, Jesus thought. They give up

too easily. I’m staying another hour.

45 In six months, Jesus had made more money working in the U.S. than he had the entire

previous year in Mexico. With the money he sent home, Celia Maria was able to buy a crib

and baby clothes. He kept just enough money to feed himself and pay his monthly rent for

the garage.

At 3:15 p.m. Jesus heard the sound of another engine coming up the hill. There were few

50 men left to compete for the curb’s best realty. A double cab Tundra stopped in front of the

men.

“I need a good rooster!” the voice said in Spanish from inside.

“ ¡Aquí está su gallo! ” or “Here is your rooster!” Jesus said, leaping forward. ‘ El mejor

gallo de Culiacan, Sinaloa. ’

55 Some men let out a howl while others laughed.

“Okay, you,” the man said, appreciating Jesus’ pride. “Get inside.”

Jesus didn’t hesitate. Quickly he grabbed the handle and opened the door. Once inside he

felt an inner peace deep down to his bones, and his muscles relaxed.

Annotations:

4, 6 · Oaxacans / Oaxaqueños ( Spanish) – people from Oaxaca, a state in the south-west of Mexico

29 · la migra ( Spanish, slang) – the US-American immigration offices or the border patrol

38 · trabajo ( Spanish) – work

43 · pinches maricones ( Spanish, derogative) – here used as a swearword undermining the Oaxacans’ masculinity

50 · realty – property in the form of land or building; valuable space

50 · double cab Tundra – type of pickup truck

53 · gallo ( Spanish) – rooster; in Latin America also: strong man

53–54 · El mejor gallo de Culiacan… ( Spanish) – The best rooster of Culiacan…

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

3.2 While sitting on the curb, Jesus remembers “the last time he saw his family” (l. 20) and the talk he had with his wife before he left. Write the dialogue in which the two consider their decision and talk about what they hope for and what they are afraid of.

(Evaluation: re-creation of text) [14 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist entered the USA illegally by crossing the Mexican border and now stays in a garage he rents. His wife, who is expecting their first child, remained in Mexico. The following passage is taken from the opening of the short story.

Today will be better, Jesus said to himself. He stood confidently along the curb with the

others. It was cold, damn cold. The men huddled close to each other, but not too close. It was

around 6:00 a.m. on a Saturday in November on the outskirts of Fallbrook, California.

“Hey Pancho,” one of the Oaxacans said. “How’s your family?”

5 “ Bien,” another Oaxacan said. “And yours?”

Damn Oaxaqueños, Jesus thought. So many of them.

He took a good look at the lot, trying to see each as they’d be seen by the locals. Only a few

were of average American height. Most were short, dark, and stout. They looked strong,

standing with broad shoulders and barrel chests.

10 Jesus was from Sinaloa, a rugged northern state on the west coast of Mexico. At five-foot-ten,

he was taller than most of the men looking for work. He was a well-built man. His fair

complexion was tinged red from days burned by the sun. Jesus was good with a hammer.

He preferred housing and cement work to landscaping. Landscaping was not his strength.

Of course the Oaxacans were good at everything.

15 The cold air stung at the back of his throat. It was easier to inhale through the nostrils. The

morning sun began to rise above the hill that was behind the workers. Most of the men had

their hands in their jacket pockets. This was one way they sized each other up. Those who

considered themselves better than others stayed still. They didn’t move side-to-side, or put

their hands near their mouths and blow like a maricon, a faggot. They were machos.

20 Jesus daydreamed, remembering the last time he saw his family. It was a beautiful May

morning in Culiacan City. Anxious about the trip north, he didn’t sleep well the night before.

Out of concern, his wife, Celia Maria, didn’t either.

“Here are your eggs with beans,” Celia Maria said. “How many tortillas would you like?”

“Just two, Vieja,” Jesus said, noticing the sadness in her voice. They’d only been married

25 fourteen months. Despite being a recently wed couple, he affectionately called her, Vieja, or

Old Love. […]

Once the cold stopped being a challenge the men moved in place passing the time, staying

limber in case they needed to run. They were in a foreign land and shared a common pain.

Some felt a strain in their hearts, a constant fear of getting caught by la migra. Others felt a

30 throb in their heads, a daily migraine of shame that could only be relieved by the analgesic

of finding work. This was Jesus’ first season away from home, and though he was surrounded

every morning by familiar faces, he was lonely. He longed for a warm embrace from his

Vieja. The sound of an engine coming up the hill snapped Jesus from his pleasant reverie.

The Oaxacans quickly lined up at the edge of the curb, placing themselves in the best spot.

35 Damn me to hell! Jesus thought. These guys are professionals. He ran to where they stood.

The vehicle came closer and closer, eventually passing by. In return for their canine-like

interest, the men got a look of disgust from the elderly man driving the car. Puffed up chests

deflated, and heads dropped several inches. There would be no trabajo for now. Jesus

walked back slowly to his favorite spot near two lush shrubs. The gringos water everything,

40 he said to himself. […]

Jesus sat on the edge of the sidewalk. He looked at his watch again: 2:55 p.m. Some of the

men were leaving, giving up for the day. Only a few hours of daylight remained, the winter

workday cut short by the sun’s early set. Pinches maricones, Jesus thought. They give up

too easily. I’m staying another hour.

45 In six months, Jesus had made more money working in the U.S. than he had the entire

previous year in Mexico. With the money he sent home, Celia Maria was able to buy a crib

and baby clothes. He kept just enough money to feed himself and pay his monthly rent for

the garage.

At 3:15 p.m. Jesus heard the sound of another engine coming up the hill. There were few

50 men left to compete for the curb’s best realty. A double cab Tundra stopped in front of the

men.

“I need a good rooster!” the voice said in Spanish from inside.

“ ¡Aquí está su gallo! ” or “Here is your rooster!” Jesus said, leaping forward. ‘ El mejor

gallo de Culiacan, Sinaloa. ’

55 Some men let out a howl while others laughed.

“Okay, you,” the man said, appreciating Jesus’ pride. “Get inside.”

Jesus didn’t hesitate. Quickly he grabbed the handle and opened the door. Once inside he

felt an inner peace deep down to his bones, and his muscles relaxed.

Annotations:

4, 6 · Oaxacans / Oaxaqueños ( Spanish) – people from Oaxaca, a state in the south-west of Mexico

29 · la migra ( Spanish, slang) – the US-American immigration offices or the border patrol

38 · trabajo ( Spanish) – work

43 · pinches maricones ( Spanish, derogative) – here used as a swearword undermining the Oaxacans’ masculinity

50 · realty – property in the form of land or building; valuable space

50 · double cab Tundra – type of pickup truck

53 · gallo ( Spanish) – rooster; in Latin America also: strong man

53–54 · El mejor gallo de Culiacan… ( Spanish) – The best rooster of Culiacan…

Klausurteil B: Sprachmittlung isoliert

4. A friend from the USA is doing a school project about how migrant workers live and work around the world. She/He would like you to tell her/him about the situation in Germany.

Using the article by Ludger Fittkau, write an email to your friend in which you outline the situation of construction workers in Germany, their employment conditions and the problems they frequently encounter.

(Mediation) [18 Punkte]

Textgrundlage: Klausurteil B

Ludger Fittkau: Ausbeutung osteuropäischer Bauarbeiter: Viel Arbeit, wenig Sicherheit

In Frankfurt hat die Maler- und Lackiererinnung die „Initiative Faires Handwerk“ gegründet, um sich für sozialverträgliche und faire Arbeitsbedingungen in der Branche einzusetzen.

Sanierung eines Altbaus im Bahnhofsviertel von Frankfurt am Main. Es ist ein Hinterhof-Gebäude, das aufwändig renoviert wird. Später sollen hier Mieter einziehen, sagt der 18 Jahre alte Maslum Bicer. Er ist Auszubildender im dritten Lehrjahr beim Malermeisterbetrieb Diemerling, der seit 80 Jahren in Frankfurt am Main angesiedelt ist. […]

5 Das Gebäude des Deutschen Gewerkschaftsbundes steht ebenfalls im Frankfurter Bahnhofsviertel, nicht weit vom Mainufer entfernt. Auf einer Etage dieses Hauses ist die Beratungsstelle „Faire Mobilität“ untergebracht. Hier werden Wanderarbeiter vor allem aus Rumänien und Bulgarien beraten, die sich auf den Baustellen des Rhein-Main-Gebietes um Lohn geprellt fühlen oder bei der Unterbringung in Sammelunterkünften ausgebeutet werden.

10 In die Beratungsstelle sind heute zwei rumänische Handwerker gekommen. Sie wollen ihren Namen nicht nennen. Michael Baumgarten ist einer der Berater und spricht rumänisch. Er übersetzt das, was die beiden Rumänen erzählen:

„[…] Sie arbeiten in der Regel zehn Stunden pro Tag. Und sie sind in einem System der Schwarzarbeit, wo so 50 zu 50 herrscht. Das heißt, ein Teil des Lohnes wird offiziell bezahlt, 15 auf das Konto, mit Lohnabrechnungen und ein Teil wird schwarz bezahlt. Und so kommen sie auf 55 Stunden pro Woche und verlieren Ansprüche auf Rente, verlieren Ansprüche auf Lohnfortzahlung und bekommen auch keinen Urlaub.“

Viele Bauarbeiter aus Südosteuropa nehmen diese Nachteile der Schwarzarbeit jedoch in Kauf, weil sie unter dem Strich immer noch mehr als das Doppelte dessen verdienen, was sie 20 in ihrer Heimat bei der Arbeit als Maurer oder Bautischler, als Einschaler oder Eisenbieger verdienen würden. Doch ein Teil ihres Lohnes wird ihnen gleich wieder für eine völlig überteuerte Unterkunft in Frankfurt am Main abgenommen, erzählt einer der beiden rumänischen Bauleute:

„Sie sind nicht zufrieden mit der Unterkunft. Sie zahlen 300 Euro in einem Vierbettzimmer 25 und das sind sehr anstrengende Bedingungen.“

Felix Diemerling von der örtlichen Malerinnung kennt diese Beschreibungen der Wanderarbeiter:

„Ja, das ist eigentlich sogar die Initialzündung dafür gewesen, dass wir gesagt haben: Wir müssen jetzt aktiv werden. Wir hatten zum Beispiel 2013 die Situation, dass auf einem 30 Frankfurter Abbruchgrundstück Arbeiter in Mülltonnen-Einhausungen genächtigt haben und da waren auch Bilder abgebildet. Das hat mich damals sehr betroffen gemacht. Und für so ein reiches Land wie Deutschland auch ein stückweit beschämt. Das ist jetzt sicher ein drastischer Fall, aber das darf halt auch nicht vorkommen. Was noch häufiger der Fall ist, dass kleine Wohnungen angemietet werden und dann in einer Zwei-Zimmer-Wohnung 10, 35 15 Menschen untergebracht werden. Meistens müssen sie dann auch noch eine ziemlich hohe Miete zahlen, so dass da auch noch Geld gemacht wird. Und das sind natürlich Zustände, die unmenschlich sind.“

Sie hätten es sich nicht vorstellen können, wie sie hier in Deutschland ausgenutzt werden, erzählen die beiden Rumänen in den Räumen der Gewerkschaften. Dadurch, dass sie einen 40 Teil ihres Lohnes nur schwarz ausgezahlt bekommen, verlieren sie Rentenanteile. Kranken- oder Urlaubsgeld wird ihnen ebenfalls vorenthalten. Das erleben nicht nur Rumänen auf staatlichen deutschen Baustellen, auf denen Subunternehmen aktiv sind. Ivan Ivanow berät hier vor allem bulgarische Wanderarbeiter, da er selbst bulgarische Wurzeln hat:

„Unabhängig von der Art und Weise, wie die Menschen ausgebeutet werden: Viele dieser 45 Baubetriebe, die Arbeitnehmer aus Osteuropa haben und nicht ordentlich bezahlen, beziehungsweise nicht ordentlich anmelden, bei denen ist das so, dass die so schnell wie möglich großen Profit auf dem Rücken der Menschen schlagen wollen. Es ist auch häufig so, dass die Menschen nicht den ihnen zustehenden Lohn bekommen. Entweder bekommen sie einen Teil des Lohns nicht bezahlt oder sie werden gar nicht bezahlt.“

Klausurteil A

Jane Setter

Will Brexit spell the end of English as an official EU language?

Jane Setter teaches phonetics as a professor at the University of Reading.

In 2016 Danuta Hübner, an MEP and chair of the European parliament’s constitutional

affairs committee, was quoted as saying, “If we don’t have the UK, we don’t have English.”

But is it as simple as that?

Until the 1990s, the dominant language of the EU was French. When the EU was the EC

5 (European Community) and the official language policy was defined, Dutch, French,

German and Italian were identified as the working languages. However, as more countries

joined, many of which had English as a second or additional language, the number of

English speakers grew until English became the majority common language.

Currently, the EU lists 24 official and working languages. The UK is the only member

10 country that gives English as its official language. There are a few member countries that

commonly use English but have nominated a different language as their EU official language.

For instance, the Republic of Ireland gives Irish Gaelic as its official language, and Malta

gives Maltese.

When Britain withdraws from the EU (and leaving aside possible negotiations with Scotland

15 or other territories), in order to remove English as an official language, as clarified in a

statement on behalf of the European commission in Ireland dated 27 June 2016, there would

have to be a unanimous vote in the European parliament in favour of doing so. Speaking at

the time of the referendum, in 2016, the German EU commissioner Günther Oettinger

explained, “We have a series of member states that speak English, and English is the world

20 language which we all accept.” So, even if there was the will to do so, getting rid of English

wouldn’t be straightforward.

Even if it did come to that, would it be a knock-down blow for the language? Historically,

English has weathered a number of storms. When colonies of the British empire sought to

gain their independence, it may have seemed logical for English – the language of the

25 oppressors – to be rejected at the same time. The fact that this did not happen, and that

English is used as an official first or second language in more than 70 countries worldwide,

points in part to its developing socioeconomic and political status during the 20th century.

The number of speakers for whom English is an unofficial second or foreign language is

greater than all other English language speakers, and continues to grow. With the decline of

30 the British empire came the rise of the United States, which has English as its official

language. Prof Lynne Murphy from the University of Sussex believes the US saved the

English language. From the perspective of its use as a global lingua franca, she has got a

point.

In fact, in some postcolonial situations, English is regarded as a more or less neutral language.

35 In India, for example, English was supposed to be phased out post-independence in 1947 in

favour of Hindi. However, as not everyone in India speaks Hindi, and many do not want to

for various cultural and political reasons, English continued to be used, and is now an

official language of India. In Hong Kong, English is still an official language despite the

return of the territory to the People’s Republic of China in 1997. As Hong Kong is an

40 international hub for trade and finance, this makes pragmatic sense, but there is also

evidence that Hong Kong people feel that the English language is part of their identity –

something that makes Hong Kong distinctive from mainland China. Singapore has speakers

of Malay, Chinese (various dialects) and Tamil, among others; in this context, English is a

unifying language.

45 But these Englishes are not “British English”, or even “American English”. The Englishes

spoken around the world have developed their own vocabulary and grammar; Euro-English

is no exception. English simply does not belong to traditional “native” English speakers any

more: it belongs to everyone who speaks it, and it will develop and change depending on the

communicative needs of speech communities. Brits and Americans need to bear this in mind

50 when using English in international settings, as they cannot assume they will be understood

by every English speaker.

So, will English cease to be a language of the EU? Probably not in the short to medium term,

either in conversations between EU member countries, MEPs, or in EU interaction with

other countries around the world. One Swedish MEP even suggested that communications

55 in the EU could be fairer in English, as it will be everyone’s second language.

In the long term, however, the continued dominance of English as a global language may

depend on its political and socioeconomic fortunes. As it is so well-established and widespread,

I believe it is likely to be used as a global lingua franca for some time.

Annotations:

Language mistakes in the original text have been corrected.

1

MEP – Member of the European Parliament

18

commissioner – here: high-ranking EU official

38

Hong Kong – a British colony from 1843 until 1997

1. Outline what Jane Setter says about the part English plays in the world now and the part it will play going forward. (Comprehension) [12 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

Jane Setter

Will Brexit spell the end of English as an official EU language?

Jane Setter teaches phonetics as a professor at the University of Reading.

In 2016 Danuta Hübner, an MEP and chair of the European parliament’s constitutional

affairs committee, was quoted as saying, “If we don’t have the UK, we don’t have English.”

But is it as simple as that?

Until the 1990s, the dominant language of the EU was French. When the EU was the EC

5 (European Community) and the official language policy was defined, Dutch, French,

German and Italian were identified as the working languages. However, as more countries

joined, many of which had English as a second or additional language, the number of

English speakers grew until English became the majority common language.

Currently, the EU lists 24 official and working languages. The UK is the only member

10 country that gives English as its official language. There are a few member countries that

commonly use English but have nominated a different language as their EU official language.

For instance, the Republic of Ireland gives Irish Gaelic as its official language, and Malta

gives Maltese.

When Britain withdraws from the EU (and leaving aside possible negotiations with Scotland

15 or other territories), in order to remove English as an official language, as clarified in a

statement on behalf of the European commission in Ireland dated 27 June 2016, there would

have to be a unanimous vote in the European parliament in favour of doing so. Speaking at

the time of the referendum, in 2016, the German EU commissioner Günther Oettinger

explained, “We have a series of member states that speak English, and English is the world

20 language which we all accept.” So, even if there was the will to do so, getting rid of English

wouldn’t be straightforward.

Even if it did come to that, would it be a knock-down blow for the language? Historically,

English has weathered a number of storms. When colonies of the British empire sought to

gain their independence, it may have seemed logical for English – the language of the

25 oppressors – to be rejected at the same time. The fact that this did not happen, and that

English is used as an official first or second language in more than 70 countries worldwide,

points in part to its developing socioeconomic and political status during the 20th century.

The number of speakers for whom English is an unofficial second or foreign language is

greater than all other English language speakers, and continues to grow. With the decline of

30 the British empire came the rise of the United States, which has English as its official

language. Prof Lynne Murphy from the University of Sussex believes the US saved the

English language. From the perspective of its use as a global lingua franca, she has got a

point.

In fact, in some postcolonial situations, English is regarded as a more or less neutral language.

35 In India, for example, English was supposed to be phased out post-independence in 1947 in

favour of Hindi. However, as not everyone in India speaks Hindi, and many do not want to

for various cultural and political reasons, English continued to be used, and is now an

official language of India. In Hong Kong, English is still an official language despite the

return of the territory to the People’s Republic of China in 1997. As Hong Kong is an

40 international hub for trade and finance, this makes pragmatic sense, but there is also

evidence that Hong Kong people feel that the English language is part of their identity –

something that makes Hong Kong distinctive from mainland China. Singapore has speakers

of Malay, Chinese (various dialects) and Tamil, among others; in this context, English is a

unifying language.

45 But these Englishes are not “British English”, or even “American English”. The Englishes

spoken around the world have developed their own vocabulary and grammar; Euro-English

is no exception. English simply does not belong to traditional “native” English speakers any

more: it belongs to everyone who speaks it, and it will develop and change depending on the

communicative needs of speech communities. Brits and Americans need to bear this in mind

50 when using English in international settings, as they cannot assume they will be understood

by every English speaker.

So, will English cease to be a language of the EU? Probably not in the short to medium term,

either in conversations between EU member countries, MEPs, or in EU interaction with

other countries around the world. One Swedish MEP even suggested that communications

55 in the EU could be fairer in English, as it will be everyone’s second language.

In the long term, however, the continued dominance of English as a global language may

depend on its political and socioeconomic fortunes. As it is so well-established and widespread,

I believe it is likely to be used as a global lingua franca for some time.

Annotations:

Language mistakes in the original text have been corrected.

1

MEP – Member of the European Parliament

18

commissioner – here: high-ranking EU official

38

Hong Kong – a British colony from 1843 until 1997

2. Analyse the way in which the author conveys her opinions, paying particular attention to her communicative strategies and her language. (Analysis) [16 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

Jane Setter

Will Brexit spell the end of English as an official EU language?

Jane Setter teaches phonetics as a professor at the University of Reading.

In 2016 Danuta Hübner, an MEP and chair of the European parliament’s constitutional

affairs committee, was quoted as saying, “If we don’t have the UK, we don’t have English.”

But is it as simple as that?

Until the 1990s, the dominant language of the EU was French. When the EU was the EC

5 (European Community) and the official language policy was defined, Dutch, French,

German and Italian were identified as the working languages. However, as more countries

joined, many of which had English as a second or additional language, the number of

English speakers grew until English became the majority common language.

Currently, the EU lists 24 official and working languages. The UK is the only member

10 country that gives English as its official language. There are a few member countries that

commonly use English but have nominated a different language as their EU official language.

For instance, the Republic of Ireland gives Irish Gaelic as its official language, and Malta

gives Maltese.

When Britain withdraws from the EU (and leaving aside possible negotiations with Scotland

15 or other territories), in order to remove English as an official language, as clarified in a

statement on behalf of the European commission in Ireland dated 27 June 2016, there would

have to be a unanimous vote in the European parliament in favour of doing so. Speaking at

the time of the referendum, in 2016, the German EU commissioner Günther Oettinger

explained, “We have a series of member states that speak English, and English is the world

20 language which we all accept.” So, even if there was the will to do so, getting rid of English

wouldn’t be straightforward.

Even if it did come to that, would it be a knock-down blow for the language? Historically,

English has weathered a number of storms. When colonies of the British empire sought to

gain their independence, it may have seemed logical for English – the language of the

25 oppressors – to be rejected at the same time. The fact that this did not happen, and that

English is used as an official first or second language in more than 70 countries worldwide,

points in part to its developing socioeconomic and political status during the 20th century.

The number of speakers for whom English is an unofficial second or foreign language is

greater than all other English language speakers, and continues to grow. With the decline of

30 the British empire came the rise of the United States, which has English as its official

language. Prof Lynne Murphy from the University of Sussex believes the US saved the

English language. From the perspective of its use as a global lingua franca, she has got a

point.

In fact, in some postcolonial situations, English is regarded as a more or less neutral language.

35 In India, for example, English was supposed to be phased out post-independence in 1947 in

favour of Hindi. However, as not everyone in India speaks Hindi, and many do not want to

for various cultural and political reasons, English continued to be used, and is now an

official language of India. In Hong Kong, English is still an official language despite the

return of the territory to the People’s Republic of China in 1997. As Hong Kong is an

40 international hub for trade and finance, this makes pragmatic sense, but there is also

evidence that Hong Kong people feel that the English language is part of their identity –

something that makes Hong Kong distinctive from mainland China. Singapore has speakers

of Malay, Chinese (various dialects) and Tamil, among others; in this context, English is a

unifying language.

45 But these Englishes are not “British English”, or even “American English”. The Englishes

spoken around the world have developed their own vocabulary and grammar; Euro-English

is no exception. English simply does not belong to traditional “native” English speakers any

more: it belongs to everyone who speaks it, and it will develop and change depending on the

communicative needs of speech communities. Brits and Americans need to bear this in mind

50 when using English in international settings, as they cannot assume they will be understood

by every English speaker.

So, will English cease to be a language of the EU? Probably not in the short to medium term,

either in conversations between EU member countries, MEPs, or in EU interaction with

other countries around the world. One Swedish MEP even suggested that communications

55 in the EU could be fairer in English, as it will be everyone’s second language.

In the long term, however, the continued dominance of English as a global language may

depend on its political and socioeconomic fortunes. As it is so well-established and widespread,

I believe it is likely to be used as a global lingua franca for some time.

Annotations:

Language mistakes in the original text have been corrected.

1

MEP – Member of the European Parliament

18

commissioner – here: high-ranking EU official

38

Hong Kong – a British colony from 1843 until 1997

3.1 Discuss what the “dominance of English” (l. 56) means for the EU and for the world as a whole. Draw on the text as well as on what you have covered in class about how globalisation affects culture and communication. (Evaluation: comment) [14 Punkte]

3.2

Your class has received an invitation to the international youth conference Succeeding in the World of Work of the 21st century. You are expected to give a debate statement addressing which skills young people need to be successful in today's digitalised and globalised world of work and in what ways schools can equip students for it. Write the speech script for your debate statement. (Evaluation: re-creation of text) (14 Punkte)

Klausurteil B: Sprachmittlung isoliert

You are spending a year as an exchange student at a grammar school in England. The school's modern languages department is setting up a website section that informs students about various foreign languages so they can choose which one to study. You have been asked to write an article about German for this section.

Using Louisa Schepers's text as your basis, write this article, describing current developments concerning the German language and its significance in a globalised world. (18 Punkte)

Klausurteil A

Jane Setter

Will Brexit spell the end of English as an official EU language?

Jane Setter teaches phonetics as a professor at the University of Reading.

In 2016 Danuta Hübner, an MEP and chair of the European parliament’s constitutional

affairs committee, was quoted as saying, “If we don’t have the UK, we don’t have English.”

But is it as simple as that?

Until the 1990s, the dominant language of the EU was French. When the EU was the EC

5 (European Community) and the official language policy was defined, Dutch, French,

German and Italian were identified as the working languages. However, as more countries

joined, many of which had English as a second or additional language, the number of

English speakers grew until English became the majority common language.

Currently, the EU lists 24 official and working languages. The UK is the only member

10 country that gives English as its official language. There are a few member countries that

commonly use English but have nominated a different language as their EU official language.

For instance, the Republic of Ireland gives Irish Gaelic as its official language, and Malta

gives Maltese.

When Britain withdraws from the EU (and leaving aside possible negotiations with Scotland

15 or other territories), in order to remove English as an official language, as clarified in a

statement on behalf of the European commission in Ireland dated 27 June 2016, there would

have to be a unanimous vote in the European parliament in favour of doing so. Speaking at

the time of the referendum, in 2016, the German EU commissioner Günther Oettinger

explained, “We have a series of member states that speak English, and English is the world

20 language which we all accept.” So, even if there was the will to do so, getting rid of English

wouldn’t be straightforward.

Even if it did come to that, would it be a knock-down blow for the language? Historically,

English has weathered a number of storms. When colonies of the British empire sought to

gain their independence, it may have seemed logical for English – the language of the

25 oppressors – to be rejected at the same time. The fact that this did not happen, and that

English is used as an official first or second language in more than 70 countries worldwide,

points in part to its developing socioeconomic and political status during the 20th century.

The number of speakers for whom English is an unofficial second or foreign language is

greater than all other English language speakers, and continues to grow. With the decline of

30 the British empire came the rise of the United States, which has English as its official

language. Prof Lynne Murphy from the University of Sussex believes the US saved the

English language. From the perspective of its use as a global lingua franca, she has got a

point.

In fact, in some postcolonial situations, English is regarded as a more or less neutral language.

35 In India, for example, English was supposed to be phased out post-independence in 1947 in

favour of Hindi. However, as not everyone in India speaks Hindi, and many do not want to

for various cultural and political reasons, English continued to be used, and is now an

official language of India. In Hong Kong, English is still an official language despite the

return of the territory to the People’s Republic of China in 1997. As Hong Kong is an

40 international hub for trade and finance, this makes pragmatic sense, but there is also

evidence that Hong Kong people feel that the English language is part of their identity –

something that makes Hong Kong distinctive from mainland China. Singapore has speakers

of Malay, Chinese (various dialects) and Tamil, among others; in this context, English is a

unifying language.

45 But these Englishes are not “British English”, or even “American English”. The Englishes

spoken around the world have developed their own vocabulary and grammar; Euro-English

is no exception. English simply does not belong to traditional “native” English speakers any

more: it belongs to everyone who speaks it, and it will develop and change depending on the

communicative needs of speech communities. Brits and Americans need to bear this in mind

50 when using English in international settings, as they cannot assume they will be understood

by every English speaker.

So, will English cease to be a language of the EU? Probably not in the short to medium term,

either in conversations between EU member countries, MEPs, or in EU interaction with

other countries around the world. One Swedish MEP even suggested that communications

55 in the EU could be fairer in English, as it will be everyone’s second language.

In the long term, however, the continued dominance of English as a global language may

depend on its political and socioeconomic fortunes. As it is so well-established and widespread,

I believe it is likely to be used as a global lingua franca for some time.

Annotations:

Language mistakes in the original text have been corrected.

1

MEP – Member of the European Parliament

18

commissioner – here: high-ranking EU official

38

Hong Kong – a British colony from 1843 until 1997

Klausurteil A

Tristan Harris

Our Brains Are No Match for Our Technology

A decade ago, Edward O. Wilson, the Harvard professor and renowned father of sociobiology,

was asked whether humans would be able to solve the crises that would confront them over

the next 100 years.

“Yes, if we are honest and smart,” he replied. “The real problem of humanity is the following:

5 We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology.”

Since Mr. Wilson’s observation, technology’s godlike powers have increased dramatically,

while the ancient, Paleolithic impulses of our brains have remained the same.

Yet this isn’t usually one of the complaints leveled against technology companies today – that

the digital infrastructures of Facebook and Google have overwhelmed the natural capacities of

10 our brains. Instead, we hear concerns that tech firms are collecting and tracking our personal

data. Or that they’re simply too big.

Let’s imagine that we managed to solve the privacy issue. In this new utopia, we would own

all our data, and tech giants would be forbidden from tracking our online whereabouts; they

would have access only to the data we agreed to share.

15 While we might see fewer creepy ads and feel less paranoid about surveillance, the troubling

trends connected to the online world would remain unaddressed.

Our addiction to social validation and bursts of “likes” would continue to destroy our attention

spans. Our brains would still be drawn to outrage and angry tweets, replacing democratic

debate with childlike he-said, she-said. Teenagers would remain vulnerable to online social

20 pressure and cyberbullying, harming their mental health.

Content algorithms would continue to drive us down rabbit holes toward extremism and

conspiracy theories, since automating recommendations is cheaper than paying human

editors to decide what’s worth our time. And radical content, incubated in insular online

communities, would continue to inspire mass shootings.

25 By influencing two billion brains in these ways, today’s social media holds the pen of world

history: The forces it has unleashed will affect future elections and even our ability to tell

fact from fiction, increasing the divisions within society. [...]

[O]ur Paleolithic brains aren’t built for omniscient awareness of the world’s suffering. Our

online news feeds aggregate all of the world’s pain and cruelty, dragging our brains into a

30 kind of learned helplessness. Technology that provides us with near-complete knowledge

without a commensurate level of agency isn’t humane.

Our Paleolithic brains also aren’t wired for truth-seeking. Information that confirms our beliefs

makes us feel good; information that challenges our beliefs doesn’t. Tech giants that give

us more of what we click on are intrinsically divisive. Decades after splitting the atom,

35 technology has split society into different ideological universes.

Simply put, technology has outmatched our brains, diminishing our capacity to address the

world’s most pressing challenges. The advertising business model built on exploiting this

mismatch has created the attention economy. In return, we get the “free” downgrading of

humanity.

40 This leaves us profoundly unsafe. With two billion humans trapped in these environments,

the attention economy has turned us into a civilization maladapted for its own survival.

Here’s the good news: We are the only species self-aware enough to identify this mismatch

between our brains and the technology we use. Which means we have the power to reverse

these trends.

45 The question is whether we can rise to the challenge, whether we can look deep within

ourselves and use that wisdom to create a new, radically more humane technology. “Know

thyself,” the ancients exhorted. We must bring our godlike technology back into alignment

with an honest understanding of our limits.

This may all sound pretty abstract, but there are concrete actions we can take.

50 First, policymakers can create a special tax for tech giants – a “downgrading tax” – that

would make their business models, based on extracting and exhausting our attention spans,

prohibitively expensive, while redistributing wealth to journalism, public education and the

creation of new platforms that privilege human values and service to society.

Second, instead of joining free social media platforms that benefit from turning us into

55 addicted, narcissistic extremists, we could agree to pay subscription fees to services that

shun “likes” for features that empower our lives offscreen, making these services, in

essence, fiduciaries acting in the best interests of humanity.

Third, instead of spreading disinformation, digital platforms could radically strengthen the

media infrastructures that protect us from malicious viral content and tech-enabled distortions

60 like “deepfakes”. [...]

To create humane technology we need to think deeply about human nature, and that means

more than just talking about privacy. This is a profound spiritual moment. We need to

understand our natural strengths – our capacity for self-awareness and critical thinking, for

reasoned debate and reflection – as well as our weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and the parts

65 of ourselves that we’ve lost control over.

The only way to make peace with technology is to make peace with ourselves.

Annotations:

5 · Paleolithic – dating back to the early Stone Age

21 · drive sb. down a rabbit hole – here: to send sb. into a questionable, unreal world

31 · a commensurate level of agency – adequate options to take action

41 · maladapted – not prepared well

57 · fiduciary – person or company that is in a position of trust, especially when controlling the money or property of others

60 · deepfakes – fabricated videos manipulated with the help of algorithms to look authentic

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

1. Describe how, according to Tristan Harris, digital technologies affect individuals and society, and what changes he proposes.

[12 Punkte]

Write your response in English, using well-connected paragraphs. (Comprehension)

Klausurteil A

Tristan Harris

Our Brains Are No Match for Our Technology

A decade ago, Edward O. Wilson, the Harvard professor and renowned father of sociobiology,

was asked whether humans would be able to solve the crises that would confront them over

the next 100 years.

“Yes, if we are honest and smart,” he replied. “The real problem of humanity is the following:

5 We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology.”

Since Mr. Wilson’s observation, technology’s godlike powers have increased dramatically,

while the ancient, Paleolithic impulses of our brains have remained the same.

Yet this isn’t usually one of the complaints leveled against technology companies today – that

the digital infrastructures of Facebook and Google have overwhelmed the natural capacities of

10 our brains. Instead, we hear concerns that tech firms are collecting and tracking our personal

data. Or that they’re simply too big.

Let’s imagine that we managed to solve the privacy issue. In this new utopia, we would own

all our data, and tech giants would be forbidden from tracking our online whereabouts; they

would have access only to the data we agreed to share.

15 While we might see fewer creepy ads and feel less paranoid about surveillance, the troubling

trends connected to the online world would remain unaddressed.

Our addiction to social validation and bursts of “likes” would continue to destroy our attention

spans. Our brains would still be drawn to outrage and angry tweets, replacing democratic

debate with childlike he-said, she-said. Teenagers would remain vulnerable to online social

20 pressure and cyberbullying, harming their mental health.

Content algorithms would continue to drive us down rabbit holes toward extremism and

conspiracy theories, since automating recommendations is cheaper than paying human

editors to decide what’s worth our time. And radical content, incubated in insular online

communities, would continue to inspire mass shootings.

25 By influencing two billion brains in these ways, today’s social media holds the pen of world

history: The forces it has unleashed will affect future elections and even our ability to tell

fact from fiction, increasing the divisions within society. [...]

[O]ur Paleolithic brains aren’t built for omniscient awareness of the world’s suffering. Our

online news feeds aggregate all of the world’s pain and cruelty, dragging our brains into a

30 kind of learned helplessness. Technology that provides us with near-complete knowledge

without a commensurate level of agency isn’t humane.

Our Paleolithic brains also aren’t wired for truth-seeking. Information that confirms our beliefs

makes us feel good; information that challenges our beliefs doesn’t. Tech giants that give

us more of what we click on are intrinsically divisive. Decades after splitting the atom,

35 technology has split society into different ideological universes.

Simply put, technology has outmatched our brains, diminishing our capacity to address the

world’s most pressing challenges. The advertising business model built on exploiting this

mismatch has created the attention economy. In return, we get the “free” downgrading of

humanity.

40 This leaves us profoundly unsafe. With two billion humans trapped in these environments,

the attention economy has turned us into a civilization maladapted for its own survival.

Here’s the good news: We are the only species self-aware enough to identify this mismatch

between our brains and the technology we use. Which means we have the power to reverse

these trends.

45 The question is whether we can rise to the challenge, whether we can look deep within

ourselves and use that wisdom to create a new, radically more humane technology. “Know

thyself,” the ancients exhorted. We must bring our godlike technology back into alignment

with an honest understanding of our limits.

This may all sound pretty abstract, but there are concrete actions we can take.

50 First, policymakers can create a special tax for tech giants – a “downgrading tax” – that

would make their business models, based on extracting and exhausting our attention spans,

prohibitively expensive, while redistributing wealth to journalism, public education and the

creation of new platforms that privilege human values and service to society.

Second, instead of joining free social media platforms that benefit from turning us into

55 addicted, narcissistic extremists, we could agree to pay subscription fees to services that

shun “likes” for features that empower our lives offscreen, making these services, in

essence, fiduciaries acting in the best interests of humanity.

Third, instead of spreading disinformation, digital platforms could radically strengthen the

media infrastructures that protect us from malicious viral content and tech-enabled distortions

60 like “deepfakes”. [...]

To create humane technology we need to think deeply about human nature, and that means

more than just talking about privacy. This is a profound spiritual moment. We need to

understand our natural strengths – our capacity for self-awareness and critical thinking, for

reasoned debate and reflection – as well as our weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and the parts

65 of ourselves that we’ve lost control over.

The only way to make peace with technology is to make peace with ourselves.

Annotations:

5 · Paleolithic – dating back to the early Stone Age

21 · drive sb. down a rabbit hole – here: to send sb. into a questionable, unreal world

31 · a commensurate level of agency – adequate options to take action

41 · maladapted – not prepared well

57 · fiduciary – person or company that is in a position of trust, especially when controlling the money or property of others

60 · deepfakes – fabricated videos manipulated with the help of algorithms to look authentic

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

2. Analyse the way in which Harris conveys his opinions about digital technologies. Consider both his line of argument and his use of language.

[16 Punkte]

Write an analytical essay in English that centres on the argumentative structure of the text as well as its stylistic and rhetorical devices. (Analysis)

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

3.1

“The American Dream continues to evolve with the advancement in technology, proving that really anyone can have a shot at it.”

Discuss this statement from an online news platform. Draw on what you have covered in class about American myths and realities.

(Evaluation: comment)

[14 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

Tristan Harris

Our Brains Are No Match for Our Technology

A decade ago, Edward O. Wilson, the Harvard professor and renowned father of sociobiology,

was asked whether humans would be able to solve the crises that would confront them over

the next 100 years.

“Yes, if we are honest and smart,” he replied. “The real problem of humanity is the following:

5 We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology.”

Since Mr. Wilson’s observation, technology’s godlike powers have increased dramatically,

while the ancient, Paleolithic impulses of our brains have remained the same.

Yet this isn’t usually one of the complaints leveled against technology companies today – that

the digital infrastructures of Facebook and Google have overwhelmed the natural capacities of

10 our brains. Instead, we hear concerns that tech firms are collecting and tracking our personal

data. Or that they’re simply too big.

Let’s imagine that we managed to solve the privacy issue. In this new utopia, we would own

all our data, and tech giants would be forbidden from tracking our online whereabouts; they

would have access only to the data we agreed to share.

15 While we might see fewer creepy ads and feel less paranoid about surveillance, the troubling

trends connected to the online world would remain unaddressed.

Our addiction to social validation and bursts of “likes” would continue to destroy our attention

spans. Our brains would still be drawn to outrage and angry tweets, replacing democratic

debate with childlike he-said, she-said. Teenagers would remain vulnerable to online social

20 pressure and cyberbullying, harming their mental health.

Content algorithms would continue to drive us down rabbit holes toward extremism and

conspiracy theories, since automating recommendations is cheaper than paying human

editors to decide what’s worth our time. And radical content, incubated in insular online

communities, would continue to inspire mass shootings.

25 By influencing two billion brains in these ways, today’s social media holds the pen of world

history: The forces it has unleashed will affect future elections and even our ability to tell

fact from fiction, increasing the divisions within society. [...]

[O]ur Paleolithic brains aren’t built for omniscient awareness of the world’s suffering. Our

online news feeds aggregate all of the world’s pain and cruelty, dragging our brains into a

30 kind of learned helplessness. Technology that provides us with near-complete knowledge

without a commensurate level of agency isn’t humane.

Our Paleolithic brains also aren’t wired for truth-seeking. Information that confirms our beliefs

makes us feel good; information that challenges our beliefs doesn’t. Tech giants that give

us more of what we click on are intrinsically divisive. Decades after splitting the atom,

35 technology has split society into different ideological universes.

Simply put, technology has outmatched our brains, diminishing our capacity to address the

world’s most pressing challenges. The advertising business model built on exploiting this

mismatch has created the attention economy. In return, we get the “free” downgrading of

humanity.

40 This leaves us profoundly unsafe. With two billion humans trapped in these environments,

the attention economy has turned us into a civilization maladapted for its own survival.

Here’s the good news: We are the only species self-aware enough to identify this mismatch

between our brains and the technology we use. Which means we have the power to reverse

these trends.

45 The question is whether we can rise to the challenge, whether we can look deep within

ourselves and use that wisdom to create a new, radically more humane technology. “Know

thyself,” the ancients exhorted. We must bring our godlike technology back into alignment

with an honest understanding of our limits.

This may all sound pretty abstract, but there are concrete actions we can take.

50 First, policymakers can create a special tax for tech giants – a “downgrading tax” – that

would make their business models, based on extracting and exhausting our attention spans,

prohibitively expensive, while redistributing wealth to journalism, public education and the

creation of new platforms that privilege human values and service to society.

Second, instead of joining free social media platforms that benefit from turning us into

55 addicted, narcissistic extremists, we could agree to pay subscription fees to services that

shun “likes” for features that empower our lives offscreen, making these services, in

essence, fiduciaries acting in the best interests of humanity.

Third, instead of spreading disinformation, digital platforms could radically strengthen the

media infrastructures that protect us from malicious viral content and tech-enabled distortions

60 like “deepfakes”. [...]

To create humane technology we need to think deeply about human nature, and that means

more than just talking about privacy. This is a profound spiritual moment. We need to

understand our natural strengths – our capacity for self-awareness and critical thinking, for

reasoned debate and reflection – as well as our weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and the parts

65 of ourselves that we’ve lost control over.

The only way to make peace with technology is to make peace with ourselves.

Annotations:

5 · Paleolithic – dating back to the early Stone Age

21 · drive sb. down a rabbit hole – here: to send sb. into a questionable, unreal world

31 · a commensurate level of agency – adequate options to take action

41 · maladapted – not prepared well

57 · fiduciary – person or company that is in a position of trust, especially when controlling the money or property of others

60 · deepfakes – fabricated videos manipulated with the help of algorithms to look authentic

Klausurteil A: Leseverstehen und Schreiben integriert

3.2 After reading Harris's article, you disagree with his view of digital technologies. Write a letter to the editor in which you comment on the opinions and recommendations put forward by Harris.

[14 Punkte]

Write a formal letter to the editor (Evaluation: re-creation of text) that takes a critical stance on Harris's pessimistic position.

Klausurteil B: Sprachmittlung isoliert

An American friend of yours now runs workshops on using digital technologies. She/he is surprised that people of every age group join her/his courses and would like to know more about the digital skills of Germans. You have come across information published by the University of Siegen. Write an email to her/him in which you report on the study, its findings and what the researchers say still needs to be done. [18 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

Tristan Harris

Our Brains Are No Match for Our Technology

A decade ago, Edward O. Wilson, the Harvard professor and renowned father of sociobiology,

was asked whether humans would be able to solve the crises that would confront them over

the next 100 years.

“Yes, if we are honest and smart,” he replied. “The real problem of humanity is the following:

5 We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology.”

Since Mr. Wilson’s observation, technology’s godlike powers have increased dramatically,

while the ancient, Paleolithic impulses of our brains have remained the same.

Yet this isn’t usually one of the complaints leveled against technology companies today – that

the digital infrastructures of Facebook and Google have overwhelmed the natural capacities of

10 our brains. Instead, we hear concerns that tech firms are collecting and tracking our personal

data. Or that they’re simply too big.

Let’s imagine that we managed to solve the privacy issue. In this new utopia, we would own

all our data, and tech giants would be forbidden from tracking our online whereabouts; they

would have access only to the data we agreed to share.

15 While we might see fewer creepy ads and feel less paranoid about surveillance, the troubling

trends connected to the online world would remain unaddressed.

Our addiction to social validation and bursts of “likes” would continue to destroy our attention

spans. Our brains would still be drawn to outrage and angry tweets, replacing democratic

debate with childlike he-said, she-said. Teenagers would remain vulnerable to online social

20 pressure and cyberbullying, harming their mental health.

Content algorithms would continue to drive us down rabbit holes toward extremism and

conspiracy theories, since automating recommendations is cheaper than paying human

editors to decide what’s worth our time. And radical content, incubated in insular online

communities, would continue to inspire mass shootings.

25 By influencing two billion brains in these ways, today’s social media holds the pen of world

history: The forces it has unleashed will affect future elections and even our ability to tell

fact from fiction, increasing the divisions within society. [...]

[O]ur Paleolithic brains aren’t built for omniscient awareness of the world’s suffering. Our

online news feeds aggregate all of the world’s pain and cruelty, dragging our brains into a

30 kind of learned helplessness. Technology that provides us with near-complete knowledge

without a commensurate level of agency isn’t humane.

Our Paleolithic brains also aren’t wired for truth-seeking. Information that confirms our beliefs

makes us feel good; information that challenges our beliefs doesn’t. Tech giants that give

us more of what we click on are intrinsically divisive. Decades after splitting the atom,

35 technology has split society into different ideological universes.

Simply put, technology has outmatched our brains, diminishing our capacity to address the

world’s most pressing challenges. The advertising business model built on exploiting this

mismatch has created the attention economy. In return, we get the “free” downgrading of

humanity.

40 This leaves us profoundly unsafe. With two billion humans trapped in these environments,

the attention economy has turned us into a civilization maladapted for its own survival.

Here’s the good news: We are the only species self-aware enough to identify this mismatch

between our brains and the technology we use. Which means we have the power to reverse

these trends.

45 The question is whether we can rise to the challenge, whether we can look deep within

ourselves and use that wisdom to create a new, radically more humane technology. “Know

thyself,” the ancients exhorted. We must bring our godlike technology back into alignment

with an honest understanding of our limits.

This may all sound pretty abstract, but there are concrete actions we can take.

50 First, policymakers can create a special tax for tech giants – a “downgrading tax” – that

would make their business models, based on extracting and exhausting our attention spans,

prohibitively expensive, while redistributing wealth to journalism, public education and the

creation of new platforms that privilege human values and service to society.

Second, instead of joining free social media platforms that benefit from turning us into

55 addicted, narcissistic extremists, we could agree to pay subscription fees to services that

shun “likes” for features that empower our lives offscreen, making these services, in

essence, fiduciaries acting in the best interests of humanity.

Third, instead of spreading disinformation, digital platforms could radically strengthen the

media infrastructures that protect us from malicious viral content and tech-enabled distortions

60 like “deepfakes”. [...]

To create humane technology we need to think deeply about human nature, and that means

more than just talking about privacy. This is a profound spiritual moment. We need to

understand our natural strengths – our capacity for self-awareness and critical thinking, for

reasoned debate and reflection – as well as our weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and the parts

65 of ourselves that we’ve lost control over.

The only way to make peace with technology is to make peace with ourselves.

Annotations:

5 · Paleolithic – dating back to the early Stone Age

21 · drive sb. down a rabbit hole – here: to send sb. into a questionable, unreal world

31 · a commensurate level of agency – adequate options to take action

41 · maladapted – not prepared well

57 · fiduciary – person or company that is in a position of trust, especially when controlling the money or property of others

60 · deepfakes – fabricated videos manipulated with the help of algorithms to look authentic