Abitur NRW Englisch 2021 · GK · Nachtermin · Weiterbildungskolleg

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist crossed the US-Mexican border without papers and now stays in a rented garage in the USA. 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 the living and working conditions of undocumented migrant workers in the USA as presented in the extract. (Comprehension) [12 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist crossed the US-Mexican border without papers and now stays in a rented garage in the USA. 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 main character and his circumstances are portrayed. Concentrate on point of view and the way language is used. (Analysis) [16 Punkte]

3.1

In May 2019, the then US President Donald Trump presented his administration's new immigration plan, 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 United States. Draw on what you have studied in class about the American Dream and globalisation.

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)

(Evaluation: comment) [14 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist crossed the US-Mexican border without papers and now stays in a rented garage in the USA. 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 with his wife before he left. Write this dialogue, in which the two consider their decision and talk about what they hope for and what they fear. (Evaluation: re-creation of text) [14 Punkte]

Klausurteil A

C. Osvaldo Gomez

The Curb

The protagonist crossed the US-Mexican border without papers and now stays in a rented garage in the USA. 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 to learn from you what the situation is like in Germany.

Using Ludger Fittkau's article as a basis, write an email to your friend in which you outline the situation of construction workers in Germany, the terms of their employment and the problems they frequently encounter.

(Mediation) [18 Punkte]

Textgrundlage: 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. […]

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.

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, 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 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 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 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, 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 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 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.“

Jane Setter

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

Jane Setter is a professor of phonetics at the University of Reading.

1 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 role English plays now and will play in the future.

(Comprehension) [12 Punkte]

Jane Setter

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

Jane Setter is a professor of phonetics at the University of Reading.

1 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 ways in which the author conveys her opinions. Concentrate on communicative strategies and the use of language.

(Analysis) [16 Punkte]

Jane Setter

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

Jane Setter is a professor of phonetics at the University of Reading.

1 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 the consequences of the "dominance of English" (l. 56) within the EU as well as globally. Draw on the text and 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 asked to give a statement for the debate on which skills are needed to be successful in today's digitalised and globalised world of work and in what ways schools can help pupils get ready for it. Write the script of your speech. (Evaluation: re-creation of text) [14 Punkte]

Jane Setter

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

Jane Setter is a professor of phonetics at the University of Reading.

1 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 B: Sprachmittlung isoliert

Ausgangstext für Klausurteil B

Louisa Schepers: Die deutsche Sprache gewinnt weltweit an Bedeutung

Wer Deutsch lernt, eignet sich fachliche Kompetenzen an und eröffnet sich dadurch neue Chancen. Noch nie galt das Deutsche als eine so nützliche Sprache, so scheint es.

Hinzu kommt der Faktor Migration. Dadurch widmete man dem Spracherwerb, gerade in den letzten Jahren, mehr Aufmerksamkeit. Auch Goethe-Institute auf der ganzen Welt verzeichnen einen Zuwachs von 20 – 30 %. Aktuell gibt es etwa 104 Millionen Muttersprachler, weiterhin fast noch einmal genauso viele Sprecher und weitere 16 Millionen Menschen lernen die Sprache momentan. Auch wenn Englisch die unumstrittene Lingua Franca ist und bleiben wird, die deutsche Sprache gewinnt unumstritten an Bedeutung.

Der deutsche Wortschatz ist vielfältig und umfasst so viele Wörter wie kaum eine andere Sprache. Der aktuelle Korpus besteht aus ca. 300.000 bis 500.000 Wörtern. Das ist ein Drittel mehr als vor 100 Jahren. Deutsch ist eine wachsende, dynamische Sprache. Täglich erweitert um neue Wörter, beispielsweise durch Zusammensetzung oder auch Fremdsprachen, profitiert die Sprache von einem konstanten Wachstum. Man denke nur an die allseits beliebten Anglizismen. Somit gab es Wörter wie „Energieeffizienz” oder „googlen” vor ein paar Jahren noch nicht, obwohl sie heute die meisten Menschen ohne Probleme verstehen dürften. Deutsch ist eine komplexe Sprache, die nicht nur durch Tradition, sondern auch Geschichte geprägt ist. Sie ist präzise und exakt, und nicht weniger abwechslungsreich in Poesie und Literatur.

Einst weit verbreitet in der Wissenschaft, hat das Deutsche längst seinen Status als Wissenschaftssprache verloren. In den Naturwissenschaften wird heute nämlich fast ausschließlich auf Englisch kommuniziert. Diesem Trend folgen auch die Geisteswissenschaften. Der Grund für den Bedeutungsverlust der deutschen Sprache ist der internationale Diskurs. Wer an ihm teilnehmen möchte, um an die notwendige Aufmerksamkeit für seine Forschungsarbeiten zu gelangen, muss dies auf Englisch tun. Dabei sah das im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert noch ganz anders aus. Ein großer Teil der naturwissenschaftlichen Forschung kam aus Deutschland und Deutsch war eine der primären Sprachen, in der publiziert wurde. Heute dagegen werden mehr als 90 % aller Forschungsarbeiten auf Englisch veröffentlicht.

Einer der größten Gründe für die Unpopularität der Sprache im 20. Jahrhundert waren die beiden Weltkriege in Zusammenhang mit den Gräueltaten des NS-Regimes, die viele Menschen mit der Sprache verbanden. Auch schämten sich viele Deutsche für die eigene Sprache. Die Politik hielt sich lange Zeit zurück und förderte die Sprache nicht aktiv. 1973 wäre es möglich gewesen, Deutsch als eine der offiziellen Sprachen der UN anerkennen zu lassen, was aber von keiner der damals zwei deutschen Seiten beantragt wurde. Ähnliches passierte in der Europäischen Union. […]

[A]uch heutzutage wird Deutsch eher als Mittel zum Zweck betrachtet und auf den Deutschunterricht in der Schule reduziert. Literarisch und kulturell erhält die deutsche Sprache unverändert wenig Förderung.

Viele Sprachwissenschaftler sehen eine direkte Verbindung zwischen einer Sprache und der Wirtschaft des Landes. Es ist deshalb interessant, sich das Bruttoinlandsprodukt, welches mit der Sprache verbunden wird, anzuschauen. Die deutsche Sprache liegt hier nach Englisch, Chinesisch und Spanisch auf dem vierten Platz. Das ökonomische Potential stellt also einen großen Faktor dafür dar, ob das Erlernen der Sprache für Menschen attraktiv ist. Viele assoziieren mit Sprache Möglichkeiten. Das kann ein Studium, die Arbeit oder ein Umzug in das Land sein.

Auch in der Wirtschaft wird die deutsche Sprache immer wichtiger. Zwar werden die meisten Verträge in Englisch abgeschlossen, doch der deutsche Markt in Österreich, der Schweiz und Deutschland wird immer attraktiver. Wer in diese nationalen Märkte vordringen möchte, hat mehr Erfolg, wenn er die Muttersprache des Landes beherrscht. Besonders beim Networking und Akquirieren von neuen Kunden macht das einen riesen Unterschied und bietet immense Vorteile. Sichere Sprachfähigkeiten scheinen hier der Schlüssel zum wirtschaftlichen Erfolg.

Anmerkungen:

Goethe-Institut – weltweit tätiges Kultur- und Sprachinstitut der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Korpus – das einer Analyse zugrunde liegende Sprachmaterial

4.

You are an exchange student at an English grammar school. The school's modern languages department is putting together information on various foreign languages for its website, so that students can decide which one to learn. You have been asked to write an article about the German language.

Using Louisa Schepers's text as your basis, write this article, describing present-day developments concerning the German language and its importance in a globalised world.

(Mediation) [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

1.

Describe the effects of digital technologies on the individual and society according to Tristan Harris and his suggestions for change. (Comprehension) [12 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

2.

Analyse the way in which Harris conveys his opinions on digital technologies. Consider both his argumentative structure and his use of language. (Analysis) [16 Punkte]

3.1

“The American Dream continues to evolve with the advancement in technology, proving that really anyone can have a shot at it.” 1 Discuss this statement, which comes from an online news platform, drawing on what you have covered in class about American myths and realities.

(Evaluation: comment) [14 Punkte]

1 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-american-dream-isnt-d_b_11250032 (Zugriff: 05.12.2020)

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

3.2

After reading Harris's article, you disagree with how he judges digital technologies. Write a letter to the editor in which you comment on the views and suggestions put forward by Harris. (Evaluation: re-creation of text) [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 B: Sprachmittlung isoliert

4. An American friend of yours has begun to run workshops on using digital technologies. She/he is surprised that people of every age group attend her/his courses and would like to know more about the digital skills of people in Germany. You have come across information from 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. (Mediation) [18 Punkte]

Das Alter spielt bei digitaler Kompetenz eine geringere Rolle als gedacht

Junge Menschen haben nicht per se eine deutlich höhere digitale Kompetenz als ältere Menschen. Das haben Dr. Michael Schuhmacher, Dr. Susanne Kollmann und Minou Seitz von der Universität Siegen herausgefunden. In einer Studie haben die WissenschaftlerInnen den Umgang von Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern mit den technischen und digitalen Strukturen des Internets der Dinge (IoT) erforscht. Unter Internet der Dinge versteht man die Vernetzung „intelligenter“ Gegenstände, sowohl untereinander als auch mit dem Internet und den NutzerInnen. Die Studie des Zentrums für ökonomische Bildung der Universität Siegen (Zöbis) ist eine der ersten zu diesem Thema in ganz Deutschland.

Smart Home, digitale Gesundheit und autonomes Fahren – um diese Themenkomplexe ging es für die Testpersonen der Studie beispielhaft. Zunächst konnten die ProbandInnen ihre Kompetenzen in einem Onlinetest selbst einschätzen. Außerdem entwickelten die ForscherInnen einen Wissenstest zu den Themen „Internet allgemein“ und „Internet der Dinge“. Anhand von Test-Situationen sollten die Befragten unter Beweis stellen, wie kompetent sie mit Datenentstehung, Datensicherheit, Datenweitergabe und Datenverarbeitung von persönlichen Daten umgingen. So konnten die WissenschaftlerInnen nicht nur die individuellen Kompetenzen messen, sondern auch feststellen, inwieweit die anfänglichen Selbsteinschätzungen der Personen zutrafen.

Das Ergebnis der Studie überrascht. Es gibt beispielsweise vier entscheidende Faktoren, die Einfluss auf das Wissen der Testpersonen in den Bereichen Internet allgemein und Internet der Dinge haben: das Geschlecht, die Vorerfahrung im Umgang mit digitalen und vernetzten Strukturen im Haushalt, die Technikaffinität sowie der Bildungshintergrund. Das Alter spielt hingegen keine Rolle. Bei der digitalen Handlungs- und Entscheidungsfähigkeit nimmt der Einfluss des Alters als Einflussfaktor zwar zu, altersbedingte Unterschiede fallen aber auch hier deutlich geringer aus als erwartet. „Die digitale Spaltung der Probanden in Jung und Alt fällt deutlich geringer und in anderer Ausprägung aus als zu Beginn der Studiendurchführung erwartet“, sagt der Siegener Forscher Michael Schuhmacher. „Zwar ist die Zahl der Menschen mit niedrigen digitalen Kompetenzfähigkeiten im Alter über 60 Jahre höher als in den Altersgruppen darunter, aber nicht in dem Maße und nicht so pauschal, wie angenommen.“

Besonders im Bereich der digitalen Gesundheit schnitt die Personengruppe über 60 Jahre gut ab. Das erklären die WissenschaftlerInnen damit, dass SeniorInnen vermutlich aufgrund ihrer Erfahrungswerte im Gesundheitsbereich entscheidende Kompetenzen mitbringen, die sie im Internet der Dinge speziell beim Thema digitale Gesundheit gut anwenden können. Bezeichnungen, die NutzerInnen alleine aufgrund ihres Geburtsjahrgangs in eine Gruppe einteilen, seien nicht sinnvoll, sagen die WissenschaftlerInnen. Dazu zählt zum Beispiel der Begriff „Digital Natives“ für junge Menschen, die mit dem Internet aufgewachsen sind.

Probanden mit dem größten Wissen sind vornehmlich männlich, haben einen hohen Bildungsabschluss, sind technikaffin und verfügen über zahlreiche Erfahrungswerte im Umgang mit digitalen und vernetzten Strukturen im Haushalt. Grundsätzlich fanden die ForscherInnen heraus, dass alle Testpersonen wenig bis kein Geld für den Schutz ihrer Daten ausgeben möchten. Das habe allerdings nichts mit Sorglosigkeit oder Ratlosigkeit zu tun. „Das ausgeprägte Motivationsdefizit hängt mit einer gewissen Resignation und Machtlosigkeit und einer daraus resultierenden Gleichgültigkeit zusammen“, erklärt Minou Seitz.

Ein Großteil der Probanden sei sich der Komplexität der datenverarbeitenden Prozesse durchaus bewusst, betrachte die Möglichkeiten zur Kontrolle der eigenen Daten aber als limitiert. Aus diesem Grund sieht die Mehrheit der ProbandInnen den Staat in der Verantwortung, den Schutz der eigenen Daten im Internet zu gewährleisten. Die ForscherInnen empfinden es deshalb als besonders wichtig, dem Empfinden der Machtlosigkeit entgegenzuwirken und das Selbstvertrauen in die eigenen Fähigkeiten und Möglichkeiten zu stärken. Die Themen Datenschutz und Datensicherheit sehen sie aus diesem Grund zum Beispiel als wichtige Inhalte im schulischen Unterricht.

Gefördert wurde die Studie aus Mitteln des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz (BMJV)...