REFERENCE FRAMEWORK
Culture and Citizenship in Québec - Secondary V
Reference Framework
introduction to the program
The Culture and Citizenship in Québec program offers a structured approach in which dialogue and critical thinking are fundamental pillars for fostering the development of knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills.
OBJECTIVES
The Culture and Citizenship in Québec program aims to implement three objectives Objectives 2 and 3 fall within the first objective.
Citizenship
The manner in which individuals live in relation to one another in their society. Citizenship implies the rights, duties and responsibilities that bind together individuals and different groups within society and the state.
1
Prepare to exercise citizenship in Québec
Aim for recognition of oneself and of others
2
Pursue the common good
3
FOUNDATIONS
The focus of the Program is the culture of Québec society, which is defined as the shared ways of thinking, feeling and acting that are expressed within a specific group or society as a whole.
The Culture and Citizenship in Québec program falls within two disciplines: sociology and ethical philosophy
Sociology
Sociology is a social science that studies the relations between individuals, groups and institutions. It uses a critical approach to observation and analysis (see p. 161) from different perspectives to better understand culture and citizenship in Québec.
Ethics
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that studies the reference points that govern human behaviour in society. It addresses actions that are considered acceptable or preferable in a given situation. The ethical approach (see p. 167) can guide solutions that aim to achieve the common good.
Sociological and ethical approaches shed light on the practice of dialogue and the development of critical thinking
Dialogue
Dialogue is a conscious process of reflection or exchange with others (or ourselves) that helps to better understand and consider different points of view about a cultural reality. Dialogue allows for the progression of thinking by combining knowledge, points of view and experiences.
Critical thinking
Critical thinking supports the construction of knowledge and decision-making. It helps to distinguish information that can be used to make informed choices. Critical thinking asks: Is this information reliable, useful and relevant?
THEMES AND CONCEPTS
The content is organized into themes that aim to achieve the Program’s objectives. In Secondary V, the themes, main concepts and specific concepts are as follows:
THEME: SEARCH FOR MEANING AND WORLD VIEWS
MAIN CONCEPTS
Construction of the self
Existential philosophical questions
Sexual agency and self-assertion
Self-reflection and introspection
Social and cultural integration Types of knowledge
SPECIFIC CONCEPTS
Interpersonal, emotional and romantic relationships
Rites of passage and significant experiences
Choices related to adulthood
Social inclusion
Religions and spiritualities
Philosophies
Ideologies
Oral, practical and experiential knowledge
The sciences
THEME: SOCIAL GROUPS AND POWER RELATIONS
MAIN CONCEPTS
Power Social inequalities
Equality and social inclusion Social movement Social change
SPECIFIC CONCEPTS
Sexism and other inequalities related to gender and sexuality
Racism and colonialism
Socio-economic
inequalities
Environmental inequalities
Egalitarian public policies
Egalitarian practices
Reconciliation
Sexuality education
Each of the themes in the Culture and Citizenship in Québec course includes content related to sexuality education. This content is part of a learning progression that presents a comprehensive, positive and inclusive view of sexuality. The goal is to enable the acquisition of knowledge and to develop respectful and egalitarian attitudes and behaviours.
Sexuality education is based on values such as gender equality, respect for diversity, respect for physical and psychological integrity, a sense of responsibility and well-being.
The concepts in sexuality education related to the themes are as follows.
Concepts in sexuality education
SEARCH FOR MEANING AND WORLD VIEWS
Construction of the self
Sexual agency and self-assertion
Self-reflection and introspection
Social and cultural integration
Interpersonal, emotional and romantic relationships
Choices related to adulthood
SOCIAL GROUPS AND POWER RELATIONS
Social inequalities
Sexism and other inequalities related to gender and sexuality
Equality and social inclusion
Egalitarian public policies
Egalitarian practices
CULTURE AND CULTURAL REALITIES
Culture
Culture is a set of more or less formalized ways of thinking, feeling and acting, which are expressed in a group or a society. Culture evolves and changes over time. There is a distinction between primary culture and secondary culture.
1
Primary culture is made up of reference points and everyday realities, often internalized since childhood. It arises from interactions with family and friends. Examples include food, spoken languages and lifestyle habits.
2
Secondary culture consists of all the works, systems of meaning and symbols that humanity has produced to reflect on primary culture. It arises from interactions with other individuals, groups or institutions. Examples include laws and knowledge learned in school or through various media.
Cultural realities
A cultural reality is an element of culture, or ways of doing things in a society at a given point in time. To understand a cultural reality, it can be studied and compared with cultural realities in other societies.
In any society, individuals and groups may have different perspectives on a cultural reality. In other words, people’s experiences and the social groups they belong to shape how they see the world. As a result, the same object of study can have different meanings depending on the perspective from which it is viewed.
Perspective
A way of looking at, perceiving or considering the world that is socially situated and connected to experiences and the different groups to which a person belongs.
Meaning
The significance attributed to things such as practices, observable facts, events, relationships, objects, data, etc.
Primary culture is transmitted in primary areas of socialization, such as in the home, while secondary culture is constructed in secondary areas of socialization, such as at school, at work or in leisure settings.
Here, as elsewhere, society is diverse and culture is not uniform. However, in Québec, a few cultural realities are shared to varying degrees. For example: values of equality and freedom, democracy, state-funded social services, state secularism, use of the French language, certain sports and certain foods.
EXAMPLES OF PERSPECTIVES
As secondary school ends, students in Québec are faced with choices related to adulthood. Here are some different perspectives on this cultural reality.
Gilbert, Secondary V student
When I finish high school, I want to take a gap year to travel and discover the world. I’m too young to know what I want in life.
Kabir, father
The key is to start studying hard right away. The world is changing so fast that you need to have more than one iron in the fire to get by!
Evelyn, Secondary IV student
I plan to enroll in CEGEP, then go to university. I know that I want to become an engineer, find a well-paying job and start a family.
Maude, Secondary V student
Everyone talks about work as if it were the only thing that matters in life. I would prefer to stay at home and devote myself entirely to educating the children I plan to have.
Stuart, guidance counselor
Whether you choose to pursue a university education or choose professional training, what matters most is finding a path where you can truly flourish. Work plays such a central role in our lives!
Veronica, mother
My daughter wants to study art and work for herself. She doesn’t want to have children and wants to pursue her dreams. I will encourage her—even though I would have found it reassuring if she had chosen a stable field like education or health care!
Giselle, grandmother
Young people today are lucky; they can choose what they want to do with their lives. My husband was pressured to take over the family business, while I was expected to stay at home and look after the children.
COMPETENCY 1
The Culture and Citizenship in Québec program is structured around two competencies. Here is the first.
Studies cultural realities
Competency 1 focuses on understanding the social and cultural environment of Québec. It involves the acquisition of knowledge and the development of know-how specific to critical research in sociology.
This competency is based on four key features that can be worked on in any order and repeated as needed.
Establish the scope of the object of study
Demonstrate an enriched understanding
C1 Studies cultural realities
SOCIOLOGY
Analyze social relations
Evaluate elements of knowledge
Sociology is a social science that studies relationships between individuals, groups and institutions. The sociological approach allows for the study of cultural realities and serves to:
Observe society using data or facts
Set aside our prejudices, opinions, perceptions and what we think we know by identifying our sociocognitive biases (see p. 173) and limitations
Better understand diverse perspectives on cultural realities
Better understand society and its dynamics
The sociological approach
Below is an overview of the steps involved in the sociological approach, with examples based on the situation provided.
Situation
1
2
As part of an egalitarian public policy, the Québec government plans to implement a new cafeteria model in Québec’s secondary schools. It wants to develop affordable menus that reflect students’ tastes and meet their nutritional needs.
Establish the scope of the object of study
Draw up a question about the cultural reality (the object of study).
E.g. What are the food preferences and nutritional needs of young people attending secondary schools in Québec?
Draw up a preliminary response (initial understanding).
E.g. Young people like to eat processed foods like burgers, hot dogs and chicken nuggets that probably do not meet their nutritional needs.
Some secondary school students, aware of allergens, tend to avoid nuts, peanuts, eggs and seafood.
Most young people eat meat.
3
Call on relevant concepts.
E.g. Offering affordable menus supports the goal of equality, as it helps to reduce economic inequalities that affect some students’ families.
The object of study is also linked to the concept of social inclusion, as it includes considerations for the dietary needs of students with allergies or other dietary restrictions.
4
Conduct an investigation to gather data or facts about the reality under study.
Data collection can be done in two ways: consulting documents or conducting empirical research.
CONSULTING DOCUMENTS
The investigation may involve gathering information from various documents (statistics, articles, photographs, testimonials, etc.).
E.g. The data I gathered by reviewing documents shows that: Young people eat a variety of foods and are concerned about having a healthy diet. Some students want to continue avoiding allergens for health reasons, and the list of allergens (gluten, fruits, nuts, dairy products containing lactose, etc.) is growing. Some young people have religious or medical restrictions.
Some students follow special diets: vegetarian, vegan, organic, etc.
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH AND ITS TECHNIQUES
Data collection through empirical research can be carried out using various techniques.
Empirical
Based on experience and observation.
Direct observation
Observation can be formal (using an observation grid) or informal (following a methodological process, without an observation grid). It allows the collection of observable information about human behaviour in a given situation.
E.g. I observe what teenagers at my school eat for lunch. I record the meals and other foods that are eaten most often and those that are not chosen.
Questionnaire or survey
A questionnaire or survey collects responses from a sample of people on a given question or topic. Respondents answer open-ended or closed-ended questions, which can be done verbally or in writing. Questions that elicit short answers can be more easily compiled.
E.g. I give a questionnaire to students who eat at school so that they can tell me what foods are in their lunch.
Interview
Individual or group interviews can be done in either a formal or less formal way using questions prepared ahead of time. They help collect information about people’s experiences, perceptions and perspectives on the cultural reality being studied.
E.g. I conduct interviews with some students at the school, asking them questions that lead them to talk about their food preferences, habits, restrictions, etc.
Analyze social relations
An analysis of social relations helps to describe social relationships based on the information gathered. Different perspectives on a cultural reality can be compared and observations made.
1
2
Identify the individuals, groups or institutions involved.
E.g. Students
Students’ families
The Ministère de l’Éducation
Nutritionists and other health professionals Schools
Describe the relationships between these people, groups or institutions.
E.g. Students want the school to consult them and offer food that they like to eat (collaborative relationship).
Students with allergies expect the school to ensure their safety (hierarchical relationship).
Families want their religious practices to be respected (collaborative relationship).
The Ministère de l’Éducation must ensure that all students can meet their nutritional needs (hierarchical relationship).
Nutritionists and other health professionals encourage students to adopt a healthy diet (hierarchical relationship [experts]).
Schools want to offer meals that students enjoy while staying within the school budget (collaborative relationship and competitive relationship [budgetary aspect]).
3
Compare meanings by identifying differences and similarities.
E.g. Students with allergies expect the school to ensure their safety when it comes to food, while students without allergies do not have this expectation.
Both schools and the Ministère de l’Éducation aim to strike a balance between the budget allocated, the food choices made by students and those recommended by health professionals.
4
Draw up findings.
E.g. Nutrition is a complex topic that touches on many aspects of life (health, religious beliefs, cultural habits, moral or environmental values, etc.). It affects people’s values, identity, tastes and needs.
Evaluate elements of knowledge
Once the information is gathered, its relevance and limitations can be assessed. This analysis must also take into account sociocognitive biases and determine limitations of the interpretation (e.g. assumptions, elements not covered that may have been important).
1
2
Is the information collected relevant and reliable?
Explanation: The questionnaire allowed me to obtain information about more young people than my circle of friends. However, the data collected is only representative of our school, not of all secondary schools in Québec.
What sociocognitive biases (see p. 173) should be considered?
Examples of answers:
Anchoring bias: I have been eating lunch with the same people since elementary school. My friends are like me: they share my culture and values. I may assume that everyone thinks and eats like us.
Confirmation bias: I may have placed more importance on answers by students whose habits are similar to mine.
Social-desirability bias: Students may say what they think I want to hear, regardless of their actual preferences and needs.
Demonstrate an enriched understanding
At this stage, the preliminary response is reviewed, and other perspectives are incorporated. Interpretations can then be compared by identifying similarities and differences.
Was the preliminary response correct?
Explanation: I was correct in assuming that most students want to continue avoiding allergens, but I underestimated the diversity of their eating habits. The study should be expanded to include several other secondary schools in order to obtain a more accurate picture of the eating habits of students in Québec.
COMPETENCY 2
Here is the second competency in the Program.
Reflects on ethical questions
Competency 2 focuses on developing the ability to understand a situation from an ethical viewpoint. This process of reflection involves closely examining concepts, points of view and their foundations through dialogue. The main goal is to choose reference points and responses that aim for recognition of oneself and of others and pursue the common good.
This competency is based on four key features that do not follow a strict sequence. They can be worked on in any order and repeated as needed.
Engage in dialogue
Discern the ethical dimensions of a situation
C2 Reflects on ethical questions
Develop a point of view
ETHICS
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that studies the values and norms underlying different behaviours to establish what is good, right and just.
The ethical reflection approach focuses on actions considered acceptable or preferable in a situation, taking into account each person’s reality and the effects on ourselves and others.
Ethical questions arise when there are tensions regarding reference points, such as principles, values or norms. These tensions arise when individuals or groups value certain reference points differently or have different ways of living. Ethical questions involve a problem to solve or a choice of actions to take.
Examine a variety of points of view
What is a reference point?
A reference point is a resource drawn from the social and cultural environment that is used to inform and enhance ethical reflection. There are many different types of reference points, for example:
Moral (e.g. values)
Legal and regulatory (e.g. charters, laws, standards)
Scientific (e.g. research findings)
Historical (e.g. World War II)
Religious (e.g. the Bible)
Technical (e.g. the Driver’s Handbook)
Artistic (e.g. movies, novels, works of art)
Experiential (e.g. walking out ceremony, meditation)
What is a value?
A value is a moral reference point that a person or group considers important and uses to identify desirable behaviours. It can represent an ideal to strive for or a cause to stand up for.
Values help guide ethical reflection. Examples of values include: Altruism Commitment Courage Education Equality Family Friendship Generosity Helping others Honesty Justice Kindness Liberty Love Perseverance
What is a norm?
Self-improvement
Sharing Solidarity
Tolerance
A norm is a rule, way of thinking or expected behaviour shared within a society or group. Norms can also serve as reference points in ethical reflection. Examples of norms include:
Laws and regulations (written rules)
Dress codes (written or unwritten rules)
Politeness (unwritten or social rule)
Lining up to wait your turn (unwritten or social rule)
Using utensils to eat (unwritten rule)
Ethical reflection approach
Ethical reflection involves examining different points of view in order to choose responses that prioritize the common good. It stimulates openness to others and consideration of each person’s feelings and experiences.
Below is an overview of the steps involved in ethical reflection, with examples based on the situation provided.
Point of view
Set of related ideas that can be held on an ethical question. These ideas are based on various reference points.
Discern
With equity in mind, some school boards have stopped banning food allergens in school lunches. Instead, they aim to prevent allergic reactions by educating students and staff.
the ethical dimensions of a situation
This step involves understanding the situation and the context in which it occurs.
1
2
3
4 Situation
What is the situation?
E.g. Some school boards no longer ban food allergens in school lunches. This may create tension between students without allergies, who are happy to no longer have restrictions, and students with allergies who need to be protected.
Who is affected?
E.g. Students with allergies
Students without allergies
Parents of students with and without allergies
School staff
Some school boards
What are the ethical issues or tensions?
E.g. In this case, a tension exists between the freedom of students without allergies and the safety of students with allergies.
What ethical questions arise from the situation?
E.g. What rules should be implemented in schools regarding food allergens?
Should we prioritize the well-being of people with allergies or that of people without allergies?
How could the well-being of people with allergies be promoted without negatively impacting those without allergies?
Examine a variety of points of view
This step involves analyzing the points of view of those involved to identify the reference points underlying them. It is also important to assess whether these points of view contain any reasoning errors.
1
What are the different points of view and the reference points underlying them?
People or groups
Parents of students with allergies
Points of view
They want food allergens banned to reduce the risk of reactions.
Students with allergies Some students would feel safer if food allergens were banned. Others want their classmates to be able to eat what they want.
Parents of students without allergies
They want the freedom to prepare or buy the food they choose for their children.
Students without allergies Some students want the freedom to eat the foods they choose. Others want to help create a safe environment for everyone.
Some school boards They prefer to focus on education, encouraging students to take responsibility and make careful choices.
Values
Health
Safety
Peace of mind
Safety Freedom of choice
Freedom of choice
Health
Culture
Freedom of choice Solidarity Inclusion
Education Prevention Freedom
Health
Reference points
Norms
It would be best to reinstate the old policy banning food allergens.
School should be a safe environment for everyone. Food choices are personal.
Food choices are a family matter.
Food choices are personal. School should be a safe environment for everyone.
Food allergens are not prohibited in most public spaces (restaurants, public transportation, etc.).
2
What are the possible reasoning errors (see p. 179)?
E.g. Appeal to tradition: Food allergens have been banned in schools for a long time, so we believe it is the right thing to do.
Hasty generalization: Allergies can be fatal in some cases, but this danger should not be generalized to all students.
Develop
a point of view
This step involves identifying possible responses and evaluating their effects on ourselves, others and society.
1
What are possible responses to the ethical question?
E.g. School boards should reinstate a ban on food allergens in schools to help ensure student safety.
School boards should allow food allergens in schools while encouraging students to take responsibility and make careful choices.
2 What response should be chosen?
3
Which reference points (values or norms) can be used?
E.g. The norm of safety can be used to justify protecting children with allergies, while the value of freedom supports allowing students to choose their own food.
E.g. It may be best to continue to ban food allergens in elementary schools, as it is safer to err on the side of caution. However, in secondary schools, the focus could shift towards encouraging students to take responsibility for making safe choices.
4
Why choose this response? How will it affect those involved?
E.g. In elementary schools, many children may lack the maturity to manage their allergies, which increases their risk. It can also be stressful for staff to monitor allergen exposure. In secondary schools, students are usually more mature and can be taught to take appropriate precautions.
Engage in dialogue
This step involves expressing your point of view while considering the points of view and feelings of all others involved, as well as using appropriate methods to support your ideas.
1
2
Consider your own feelings and point of view and those of others.
E.g. I believe it is crucial to avoid exposing children to allergens, as it can pose serious health risks. At the same time, I understand that banning certain foods can be inconvenient for some parents, who may struggle to prepare lunches that are varied, healthy and affordable.
What methods are used to support your ideas when expressing a point of view?
E.g. I use scientific sources to define what anaphylactic shock is and what its consequences can be. I also look for news reports or statistics about real-life cases of allergic reactions.
3
Create conditions conducive to interaction.
E.g. I make an effort to understand others’ ideas by asking questions when necessary.
COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL AND ETHICAL APPROACHES
Sociological approach
Research process that involves analyzing social relations from different perspectives.
Objective: To understand and explain social relations within Québec culture
Steps
Ask questions and gather information about a cultural reality
Analyze social relations
Evaluate information and how it is interpreted
Develop a deeper understanding
Examples of sociological questions
What kind of volunteer work do young Quebecers take part in?
Which environmental issues do Quebecers mobilize around the most?
Ethical reflection approach
Reasoning process that involves analyzing different points of view.
Objective: To determine possible responses or actions in situations involving ethical tensions
Steps
Discern the ethical dimensions of a situation
Examine a variety of points of view
Develop a point of view
Engage in open dialogue
Examples of ethical questions
Should schools recognize students’ volunteer work with academic credits or rewards?
What would be the best ecological initiatives to implement at school?
These two approaches offer complementary ways of looking at cultural realities, helping to build a deeper and more nuanced understanding of Québec society and culture. They encourage:
Considering diverse perspectives and points of view
Developing critical thinking skills
Engaging in meaningful dialogue
Exercising active citizenship to improve community life
tools for critical thinking
Critical thinking plays a key role in the construction of knowledge and decision-making. It involves carefully considering the criteria that guide our choices in different contexts. This section introduces some common errors in thinking as well as tools to strengthen critical thinking skills.
SOCIOCOGNITIVE BIASES
A sociocognitive bias is a mental shortcut based on a subjective perception of reality. It provides a swift assessment of a situation by using information from the social and cultural environment. However, processing information too quickly can lead to systematic errors in thinking. To recognize and avoid the trap of sociocognitive biases, they have to be identified.
Confirmation bias
Giving more weight to information and sources that confirm a hypothesis.
A teenager browsing the Internet: Here’s an article saying social media is good for young people. I’ll show this to my mom next time she says I’m wasting time on my phone!
1 2
A mother watching a news story about the environmental impact of meat production. To her son: See? I told you eating tofu is better for the environment!
Repetition effect
Perceiving information as credible simply because it is repeated, at the expense of new information.
1 2
Teenager: I saw an article saying these headphones aren’t well made, but everyone at school says that they’re the best, so they must be good!
Man: After all those ad campaigns, this toothpaste is selling like crazy—even though my dentist says it’s no better than any other brand.
Anchoring bias
Retaining a piece of information as a reference because it was the first acquired on a subject or, at first glance, it seems to be especially important.
1
2
Teenager: I’m having a harder time seeing the board at the front of the classroom lately. I think my eyesight’s getting worse.
Friend: You should eat more carrots. My mom always says they’re good for your eyes.
Teacher: One student came to the first class without any of his supplies. I have a feeling he’s going to be difficult all year.
Halo effect
Making a general judgment that is usually positive about a person or thing based on the perception of a specific characteristic.
1
2
Actor: The company hired me to do a cologne commercial because people think I’m handsome, talented and charismatic. They’re counting on people who use the product to attribute the same qualities to themselves.
Person at a restaurant: That guy’s wearing a sharp, expensive-looking suit. He must have a high-powered job at a successful company.
Social-desirability bias
Seeking to present oneself in a manner that will be viewed favourably by others, even at the expense of accuracy.
1 2
Doctor: Do you eat lots of fruits and vegetables?
Patient: Absolutely! At least eight or nine servings a day. (Thinking: Okay, maybe I’m exaggerating a bit. )
Father arriving home from work: Have you been playing that video game for a long time?
Daughter: Don’t worry, Dad! It’s only been 45 minutes. (She knows it’s been much longer.)
Essentialism bias
Assuming that a person, a group or a social phenomenon has a fixed, unchanging trait or natural character.
1
2
Teenager: I invited my cousin to skateboard with us at the park.
Friend: The one who’s super good at video games? He won’t come. Gamers don’t play sports. They just stay in their rooms and never talk to anyone!
Girl 1: Her new boyfriend is a hockey player. I bet it’s going to end badly.
Girl 2: Yeah, hockey players are never serious about relationships!
Omission bias
Believing that harm caused by action is worse than harm caused by inaction.
1 2
Woman thinking about visiting her aging mother: If I only stay for a few minutes, she’ll be upset that I didn’t stay longer. Since I don’t have much time, maybe it’s better not to go at all.
Shopper at the pharmacy: I’ve heard this medication works well, but it might have side effects. Maybe it’s safer if I don’t take it.
TYPES OF JUDGMENT
To judge means to form an opinion or take a position on something. A judgment is a statement that favours a reality (or fact), a value, a prescription or a preference. The ability to recognize the different types of judgment aids in understanding the basis for the ideas being expressed.
Reality judgment (or factual judgment)
Statement that is intended to be plausible because of something observed, an event or a person’s account. Even if it seems true, a reality judgment may be false.
In Québec, speaking French is mandatory everywhere because French is the official language. (A reality judgment that is false, based on a fact.)
All women weigh less than men because they have a lower percentage of body water (about 52-55%) compared to men (about 60%). (A reality judgment that is false, based on a fact.)
Last summer, lightning struck a tree in my yard. Now I’m safe during thunderstorms, because I read that lightning never strikes the same place twice. (A reality judgment that is false, based on information that is not true.)
Value judgment
Statement prioritizing a norm, value, duty or moral obligation.
In Québec, people eat dinner earlier than in Italy or Spain. It’s a much more sensible approach.
In a society that values solidarity, it is essential to give back to those in need.
Combating elder abuse is crucial.
Fighting child poverty is not only a responsibility, but also a social investment.
I suggest you start saving now…
Prescriptive judgment
A recommendation, an order or a suggestion that encourages an action, a change to a situation or a solution to a problem.
I recommend hiring a French tutor to help you prepare for the ministry exam.
I suggest you start saving now. Everyone needs to ensure their financial security in retirement. It’s essential to service your car before winter to avoid problems.
Now that you’re renting your first apartment, I recommend creating a budget to help you manage your monthly expenses.
You should volunteer in your community. Everyone needs to get involved!
Preference judgment
Statement expressing approval of or an aversion to something.
I prefer watching TV series from Québec over ones from the U.S.
I’d rather study at the student café at lunchtime than in my room in the evening.
Meals with rice are better than meals with quinoa.
You’ll never catch me curling. I can’t stand that sport!
I avoid romantic movies at all costs. They’re just not my thing.
TYPES OF REASONING
Reasoning is a logical sequence of related ideas leading to a conclusion. It allows us to move from a spontaneous point of view to a well-considered position.
Deductive reasoning
Applying a general rule to specific or unique situations.
Example 1
1. People who study before an exam are more likely to pass.
2. Joaquim and Nabilla studied for their exam.
3. Therefore, Joaquim and Nabilla are more likely to pass.
Example 2
1. Individual efforts to reduce waste help protect the environment.
2. Mia has started composting her organic waste.
3. Therefore, Mia is helping to protect the environment.
Inductive reasoning
Making a general rule after observing various specific or unique situations.
Example 1
1. Every time Chan eats vegetables, he feels full of energy.
2. When my sister eats vegetables, she feels energized.
3. Therefore, eating vegetables gives you energy.
Example 2
1. Many retirees in Québec go south for the winter.
2. Many families in Québec travel to the Caribbean during the winter holidays and March break.
3. Therefore, many people in Québec seek southern destinations in winter.
Reasoning by analogy
Supporting an idea by determining that two situations are alike, proportionate or equivalent because they share similar characteristics.
Example 1
1. A car runs better when it is regularly serviced.
2. The human body functions well when we take care of it.
3. Therefore, taking care of your body is like servicing a car.
Example 2
1. A good house needs a solid foundation.
2. A strong relationship must be built on trust.
3. Therefore, trust is like the foundation of a house. It is essential for a solid relationship.
REASONING ERRORS
Reasoning can still be flawed even when it seems valid. Whether intentional or not, reasoning errors can hinder dialogue. These errors happen when a point of view is supported by poorly developed arguments or when information is inaccurate, incomplete or misused. Questioning commonly held beliefs and seeking out accurate information helps to evaluate how relevant and valid an argument really is.
“Two
wrongs don’t make a right” argument
Justifying behaviour by pointing out that others behave just as badly, if not worse. It’s okay if I copy someone’s homework. Lots of other students do it all the time.
I get criticized for being late to work, even though my coworkers show up later than I do.
Why do my parents get mad when I download movies illegally? There are people who pirate software that costs way more!
When only two ideas are presented, there could be many other possibilities. It makes sense to consider unspoken alternatives.
A wrongdoing does not become acceptable simply because someone else has done something similar or worse!
False dilemma
Presenting two options as the only possibilities, framing one as undesirable to make the other seem like the only valid choice.
Either we raise taxes or reduce public services.
If you don’t accept this promotion, you’ll never have another opportunity for advancement.
We have to stop using social media entirely or it will take control of our lives.
Argument from authority
Appealing incorrectly or inappropriately to a person’s authority in order to support an argument.
The best poutine in Québec is on Île d’Orléans. A popular blogger said so.
Wine is good for you. I heard a famous chef say that on a podcast.
That movie is really bad. My dad told me so.
The fact that everyone is saying the same thing does not make the information true. Our point of view is sometimes overly influenced by the need to follow others or keep up with trends.
Is the person considered an authority because of genuine expertise or is their reputation or status simply being used to lend credibility to an idea?
Appeal to the people
Justifying an idea as true or acceptable solely on the grounds that many people agree with it, without verifying if it is actually true.
If that restaurant is always crowded, the food must be excellent.
Everyone I know is investing in cryptocurrency, so it must be a good investment. I’m going to invest in it too.
A lot of people are saying that the latest Batman movie is amazing. It must be true!
Appeal to stereotype
Appealing to a fixed view about a group of people without taking into account the characteristics of each individual. This view is generally negative and based on false or incomplete information.
Politicians are corrupt.
Young people don’t read books anymore.
Older people don’t understand new technologies.
Every individual is complex and unique. Stereotypes are problematic because they reinforce prejudices that are often used to maintain power relations or dynamics.
Hasty generalization
Arriving at a general conclusion based on a single case or just a few cases, without confirming that the sample is representative enough to support the conclusion.
One of my friends had his wallet stolen while travelling. Travelling is dangerous.
At lunch today, I saw two students glued to their phones. All students must be addicted to their cell phones.
My friend’s teenager quit her job after only a week. Young people are unreliable and don’t stay in the same job for long.
A theory cannot be based on just one or a few experiences, as they may not represent a broader pattern or trend.
Personal attacks can be hurtful. It’s better to focus on arguments and facts rather than our perception of people.
Personal attack
Attacking someone by undermining their credibility rather than their arguments.
How can you talk about public health when you eat junk food all the time?
Don’t listen to Mirna. She doesn’t know anything about finance. She’s just an influencer.
Your views on education are wrong. You didn’t even finish high school.
Appeal to the crowd
Accepting or rejecting an argument because it is supported by a person or group seen as admirable or unworthy of respect.
You’re probably going to like your new stepdad because everyone he knows likes him.
You should try this new training method. Most of the athletes on our team already use it.
This theory about climate change isn’t valid because it’s supported by conspiracy theorists.
We can consider the ideas of people we respect without necessarily agreeing with them. What matters is understanding the reasons that support our own point of view.
World’s Best Dad
Exaggerating or oversimplifying can make dialogue impossible. It is important to focus on the other person’s actual point of view without twisting or changing it.
Straw man argument
Twisting someone’s position or words, especially by exaggerating or simplifying them, so that they do not seem credible.
Dad wants to limit our screen time. He basically wants us to live in a cave with no electricity!
My friend Thalia thinks that we should eat less meat to help the environment. She’s trying to force us all to become vegetarians.
You want to improve safety at work? You might as well make every person work inside a plastic bubble!
Appeal to tradition
Justifying an argument solely by saying it is supported by tradition.
We should keep printing all newspapers. That’s what we’ve been doing for hundreds of years.
The wedding has to take place in a church. In our family, that’s where everyone gets married.
The men in our family have always played hockey, so you have to play too!
Besides, it’s our national sport.
Supporting an action or idea simply because it has been practised for a long time can prevent us from questioning why the tradition exists. It is important to consider whether it is still relevant.
Arguing that something is better just because it is new.
We should buy this new kind of cereal. It’s probably more nutritious.
This food delivery app must be better than the others, since it just came out.
This phone is brand new on the market. It must be superior to the older model.
Energy+
Advertisements often emphasize that a product is new. However, it is important to weigh the possible advantages and disadvantages of anything new. Is it really better?
Appeal to emotion Appeal to novelty
Shifting attention to emotional realities that are not relevant to the subject being debated.
This environmental policy absolutely must be enacted. Think of all the animals that will suffer or even die if it isn’t.
Yumi, if you don’t support this cause, it’s like you’re abandoning all those who suffer in silence.
If you don’t contribute to this charity, you’re heartless.
An appeal to emotion is not about encouraging careful thought; it seeks to provoke a reaction. A better approach is to set emotion aside and focus on facts.
Shifting attention to the idea that the argument has not yet been proven false.
Some say dreams might predict the future. No one has proven them wrong.
Scientists have yet to prove that ghosts are not real. That means ghosts might be all around us.
This new type of plastic is probably eco-friendly. So far, it hasn’t been shown to pollute the environment.
False analogy Appeal to ignorance
The burden of proof means that you must prove your claim is true, not that others must prove it is false. A lack of proof that something is false is not the same as proof that it is true.
Attempting to justify a conclusion with an analogy between two things that are not similar enough to justify the comparison.
Having a pet is like having a new game: you can play with it whenever you want and put it aside when you’re done.
Running a country is like running a business. Any good CEO would make a great prime minister.
To win at gambling, you have to play often. It’s like sports: the more you do it, the more it pays off.
Comparing two situations with different contexts or objectives can lead to false conclusions.
The slippery slope makes an action seem as though it will cause disaster through a chain of unlikely events, even though the disaster can often be avoided.
False cause
An argument based on a doubtful cause-and-effect relationship between two things.
Lavender has a calming effect, so if you put a lavender sachet under your sheets, you won’t get leg cramps at night.
Since the school put computers in the classroom, student grades have fallen. Using computers causes students to fail.
Every time there’s an election, taxes go up. Clearly, elections make taxes increase.
Slippery slope
Claiming that an action will lead to a terrible outcome based on causes and effects that, on examination, prove to be unlikely, if not impossible.
If we start giving grants to artists, everyone will want to become one, which will lead to a shortage of people working in the trades.
If we don’t put limits on video games, we’re putting our children’s health and education at risk.
If I don’t go to this party, I’ll lose all my friends and become a social failure.
False cause is a reasoning error where one thing is wrongly assumed to cause another without solid evidence.
Conspiracy theory
Concluding without sufficient proof that a person or group that profits from a particular situation is somehow the origin, or the cause, of that situation.
Certain groups rig election results to make sure their candidates win.
Governments control what’s taught in schools, adding propaganda to the curriculum to influence how students think.
Pharmaceutical companies are hiding cancer cures so that they can keep selling their expensive treatments.
Conspiracy theories seem like an easy way to dismiss a claim, but often lead to conclusions that lack evidence.
tools for dialogue
FORMS OF DIALOGUE
Dialogue is a conscious process of reflection, or an interaction with others, that leads to recognizing and understanding different points of view about a cultural reality.
Dialogue allows the progression of thinking by combining knowledge, points of view and experiences. Different types of dialogue can be used depending on the topic or the goal of the conversation.
Narration
Written or verbal account of a series of facts, events or experiences.
1
2
A friend tells you about their trip to Europe in great detail. They describe places they visited, people they met and stories that happened along the way.
A novelist describes events from another era, showing how her female protagonist was affected when Québec gave women the right to vote in 1940.
Conversation
Exchange between two or more people with the goal of sharing their ideas or experiences.
1
2
Two friends share their thoughts about an action movie they watched together.
Two neighbours talk about their vacation plans, including places they would like to visit.
Discussion
Examination of opinions, ideas or arguments in a sustained exchange.
1
2
Two social workers discuss ways to support a young man who is hearing impaired.
During a focus group, consumers discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different phone models in order to make a choice.
Interview
Meeting for the purpose of asking one or more people questions about their activities, ideas, experiences, etc.
1
2
A doctor asks a patient questions in order to better understand his symptoms, and writes the answers in his file.
My sister gets a job interview where she’s asked about her strengths, weaknesses and experience.
Panel
Group meeting of people chosen for their knowledge of a given question so that they can share their respective points of view, develop a general view of the question and engage in discussion with an audience.
1
2
At a conference, researchers speak about the social challenges of achieving gender equality in Québec. After their presentation, they answer questions from the audience.
Experts in artificial intelligence talk to a group of students about the growing popularity of AI and precautions needed in the field. Afterwards, the students pose questions.
Deliberation
Examination of different aspects of a question (facts, interests involved, norms and values, probable consequences, etc.), through personal reflection or with others, in order to reach a decision.
1 2
After a trial, jury members review the evidence and witness statements before delivering their verdict.
I asked my mom if I could go on a trip with my friends this summer, and she’s in the other room thinking about it. I can’t wait to find out what she decides!
Debate
Structured exchange between people with differing views on a controversial issue, with each side making arguments to support their position.
1
Candidates in a provincial election take positions on issues like the economy, health care and education. They respond to diverse arguments by their opponents.
2
Graffiti: is it art or vandalism? Street artists and taggers are invited to debate the question on a radio show.
CONDITIONS CONDUCIVE TO INTERACTION
Conditions conducive to interaction help make conversations more respectful and effective.
1
Abide by rules that govern the interaction.
Follow the agreed-upon structure for the dialogue.
E.g. Wait your turn to speak.
3
Pay attention to what others are saying.
Focus and listen carefully.
E.g. Do not be distracted by your phone when someone is talking to you.
2
Identify the purpose and subject of the dialogue.
Stick to the goal of the exchange (e.g. to inform, explain, persuade or tell a story) and stay on topic.
E.g. Avoid asking unrelated questions.
4
Pay attention to nonverbal communication of both yourself and others.
Be aware of gestures and facial expressions (both your own and others’) during the exchange.
E.g. Watch the other person’s face and body language for signs that they understand what you are saying.
5
Respond to questions.
Respond to people’s questions to help them fully understand.
E.g. Listen carefully to questions and answer as clearly as you can with the information you have.
6
Make sure to understand the ideas expressed by others.
Ask for clarification when needed.
E.g. If you do not understand something, ask right away so that you don’t lose track of the discussion.
METHODS TO SUPPORT ONE’S IDEAS
Giving examples
Validate or demonstrate an idea by referring to an act, an event, a person, a figure or a thing.
Kamal is teaching his students about the importance of social engagement. To explain this idea, he gives the example of the 2020 civil rights protests in North America, when millions of people protested against racial injustice. These protests led to major changes, such as police policy reforms and greater awareness of social justice issues.
Making connections with the ideas of others
Relate an idea to previous ideas, either in dialogue or in reflection.
Jocelyn is a construction contractor who wants to hire people from more diverse backgrounds. During Jocelyn’s presentation to the team, one of the employees builds on the idea by suggesting that they include workshops on gender stereotypes in the construction industry
Defining
Clarify an idea by identifying its main and distinctive characteristics.
Amal, a high school teacher, stresses the importance of sustainable development She explains that this concept means using resources to meet the needs of the present while also preserving resources for future needs
Giving reasons
Legitimize an idea by supporting it with arguments
Sexuality education helps reduce the risk of unplanned pregnancy and STIs. It gives young people accurate information and helps them build the skills to make informed decisions about their sexual health.
Distinguishing
Highlight characteristics that help distinguish between two similar things
Even though people treat them as the same, generic medications are not always identical to brand-name drugs. They often differ in their inactive ingredients, appearance (colour, shape and markings) and price
Drawing up an opposing view
Propose an idea that is different from that of another person or people. An opposing view should be supported by reasons, examples or counterexamples
Kimberly thinks that a university degree is not necessary to achieve professional success She believes that many good jobs can be accessed through vocational training: for example, careers like hairdressing or plumbing offer excellent job opportunities
Giving counterexamples
Present an example to invalidate an idea (statement, rule or declaration) that has been presented as universal.
Mei says teenagers don’t like studying. Chloe responds that many students at her school eagerly participate in tutoring programs
Rephrasing what others say
Repeat an idea in one’s own words in order to make sure it is understood.
Émilie tells her friend that using screens before bed can make falling asleep harder. Esteban rephrases by saying that looking at screens at night can interfere with sleep
Summarizing
Present an idea concisely, including its essential elements, so it can be understood or compared.
In his presentation about the benefits of recycling, Thiên refers to a newspaper article that explains the advantages in detail. According to the article, he says, recycling reduces waste, lowers pollution and conserves resources
Examining the other side of a position
Challenge an idea by considering an opposite point of view This exercise is especially relevant when there is broad consensus on an idea.
At a restaurant, Alan says to Omar, “Buying local products is good for the economy and the environment.” Omar replies, “I agree. However, some imported products can be cheaper, which helps consumers save money.”
Adding nuance
Point out differences in something that seems the same as others or point out similarities between two things that seem different. The ability to add nuance helps to avoid generalizations and prejudices.
During dinner, Laurie’s father says, “Young people aren’t interested in politics.” Laurie replies, “It’s true that many young people aren’t very interested in politics, but others do stay informed about important social issues Some even take part in debates.”
Making analogies
Compare two different situations with similar aspects. An analogy is often used to make something clear by drawing a parallel with something more familiar
Ethan explains his philosophy on finances to his mother. He says, “Having a balanced budget is a bit like eating: you have to adjust your consumption based on your needs.”
Identifying presumptions
Make clear what is implied in ideas or assumed without being said
Juan is talking with his sister, Guadalupe, and says, “It’s good to have a passion for something. You should start playing the piano again.” She replies, “So, you think I shouldn’t have stopped playing the piano.”
Distinguishing degree and nature
Determine whether elements are part of a continuum (difference in degree) or represent a logical break (difference in nature), and whether or not they belong to the same phenomenon.
Difference of degree
Dara, a gym teacher, talks about the impact of physical activity on health. She says that a daily 30-minute walk improves cardiovascular health; and a daily hour-long walk has even greater benefits for cardiovascular health. This shows that the health benefits of walking vary depending on the duration of the activity. (Difference of degree between 30 minutes and one hour of walking)
Difference of nature
In the next class, Dara discusses the effects of different types of physical activity on the body. She uses strength training and dance as examples. Strength training helps develop muscular strength, while dance also improves flexibility. Distinguishing these activities and their respective benefits helps us understand the importance of varying exercises to achieve better overall health. (Difference of nature between the two types of activity with different benefits)
Construction of the self:
The process of developing individuals’ perceptions of themselves. This process is informed by all the experiences and social relationships established throughout life. The self includes the characteristics, skills, attitudes and values that a person attributes to themselves.
Cultural reality: Element of culture. In the Culture and Citizenship in Québec Program at the secondary level, cultural realities correspond to themes, which group concepts necessary to the study of culture in Québec.
Culture: Set of ways of thinking, feeling and acting—formalized or not—that are shared by distinct groups of people. Culture includes the arts and literature, but also ways of life, rules governing legal and political systems, traditions and beliefs. Primary culture refers to the reference points and presuppositions that are part of daily life and have often been internalized since childhood. Secondary culture is made up of the set of works, systems of meaning and symbols that humanity has produced to reflect objectively on the primary culture in dialogue with others. Culture defines both the heritage and the future of groups of people.
Dialogue: Deliberate act of reflection or interaction with others that is intended to lead to the recognition and understanding of different points of view about a cultural reality. Dialogue helps to unite rather than separate and involves a progression of thinking
through the integration of a wide variety of knowledge, points of view and experiences.
Empirical research techniques:
Direct observation: Observation can be formal (with an observation checklist) or informal (without a checklist). It allows for the collection of observable information about human behaviour in a given situation. It is referred to as direct observation when the observer stays removed from the situation, and participant observation when the observer plays an active role, such as being part of the studied group.
Questionnaire (or survey):
Questionnaires are designed to collect responses about a question or topic from a sample of people that can vary in size.
Interview: Interviews, conducted either individually or in groups, can be more structured (using prepared questions) or less structured. Interviews can be used, for instance, to collect information on participants’ experiences, perceptions and perspectives related to the cultural realities being studied in order to better understand them.
Equality: Equal status or treatment of all persons. When equality refers to having the same rights and freedoms as others, it is called equality in law (de jure or formal equality). When it refers to living conditions that influence the exercise of rights, such as socio-economic status, it is called de facto equality.
Ethical question: Question that relates to a subject to be examined or a problem to be resolved with regard to principles, values and norms set by a person or the members of a group to guide and regulate their behaviour.
Ethics: Branch of philosophy that studies the values and norms underlying different behaviours with a view to establishing what is good, right and just. It involves a reflective, critical and rational approach focusing on the actions that are acceptable or preferred in situations where there is tension between values, norms, rules, behaviours, preferences, experiences and feelings, or where it is difficult or impossible to satisfy everyone.
Forms of dialogue:
Conversation: An exchange between two or more people with the goal of sharing their ideas or experiences.
Debate: A structured exchange between people with different opinions on a controversial subject and that showcases the arguments supporting each position.
Deliberation: An examination within the self or with other people of different aspects of a question (e.g. facts, interests at issue, norms and values, probable consequences of a decision) in order to reach a decision.
Discussion: An examination of opinions, ideas or arguments within the framework of a sustained exchange.
Interview: A planned meeting for the purpose of asking one
or more people questions about their activities, ideas, experiences, etc.
Narration: A detailed written or verbal account of a series of facts, events or experiences.
Panel: A meeting between various people selected for their knowledge of a given question, convened so that they can share their respective points of view, develop a general view of the question and engage in discussion with an audience.
Judgment: Idea that favours a fact or reality, a value, a prescription or a preference.
Methods to support one’s ideas:
Adding nuance: Bringing out variations in something that was previously perceived as uniform or, on the contrary, attenuating the contrasts or the differences between two things previously perceived as different. The ability to add nuance allows us to avoid generalizations or prejudices, among other things.
Defining: Clarifying an idea by indicating the main and distinctive characteristics.
Distinguishing: Highlighting characteristics that make it possible to differentiate between two apparently similar elements.
Distinguishing degree and nature: Using criteria to determine whether two or more elements are in continuity (difference of degree) or in logical rupture (difference of nature), whether
or not they are the result of the same phenomenon.
Drawing up an opposing view: Proposing an idea that is different from that of one or more other people; expressing an opposing view must be supported by examples, reasons or counterexamples.
Examining the other side of a position: Challenging an idea by imagining an opposite point of view. This exercise is relevant when there is a consensus on an idea.
Giving counterexamples:
Presenting an example to invalidate an idea (statement, rule or declaration) presented as universal.
Giving examples: Validating or demonstrating an idea by referring to an act, an event, a person or figure or a specific object.
Giving reasons: Seeking to legitimize an idea by supporting it with arguments.
Identifying presumptions:
Highlighting what is implied or previously accepted in ideas without being said.
Making analogies: Comparing two situations that are different but have similar aspects. The analogy is often used to make something clear by drawing a parallel with a more familiar situation.
Making connections with the ideas of others: Relating an idea to previous ideas, either in dialogue or for oneself.
Rephrasing what others say: Repeating an idea in one’s own words in order to make sure it is understood.
Summarizing: Presenting an idea concisely, retaining the essential elements for it to be understood or compared.
Norm: A rule, way of thinking or behaviour that is expected, more or less formally, in society or within a specific group. Serving as a guide to actions, a norm is more or less binding, depending on how much it is shared by the members of a group. People whose behaviour of speech falls outside of—or against—the norm may be sanctioned.
Perspective: A way of looking at, perceiving or considering the world that is socially situated and connected to experiences and to the different groups to which one belongs.
Point of view: A set of related ideas that can be held on an ethical question. These ideas are based on different reference points.
Power: The ability of an individual, a group or an institution to assert its will within a relationship. Power is always present in relationships, in varying degrees, depending on the situation and indicates the asymmetry between the parties involved.
Reasoning: A logical sequence of related ideas leading to a conclusion.
Reasoning error: Reasoning that is incorrect, although it seems valid.
Appeal to emotion: Shifting attention to emotional realities that are not relevant to the subject of the debate.
Appeal to ignorance: Shifting attention to the idea that the argument has not yet been proven false.
Appeal to novelty: Making an argument that seems to be justified by the sole fact that it is new or innovative.
Appeal to stereotype: Appealing to a fixed view of a group of people without taking into account the characteristics of each individual. This view is generally negative and based on false or incomplete information.
Appeal to tradition: Making an argument that seems to be justified by the sole fact that it is supported by tradition.
Appeal to the crowd (“bandwagon”): Accepting or rejecting an argument because it is supported by a person or group deemed to be admirable or unworthy of respect.
Appeal to the people (ad populum argument): Justifying the idea that something is true or acceptable based solely on the fact that a large number of people agree that it is so, without verifying that it is so.
Argument from authority: Appealing incorrectly or inappropriately to a person’s authority to support an argument.
Conspiracy theory: Concluding without sufficient proof that a person or group of people that profits from a particular situation is somehow at the origin or is the cause of that situation.
False analogy: Attempting to justify a conclusion with an analogy between two phenomena that are not similar enough to justify the comparison.
False cause: Arguing based on a doubtful cause-effect relationship between two phenomena.
False dilemma: Presenting two options as the only possible options. Since one is undesirable, the other must be the correct choice.
Hasty generalization: Arriving at a general conclusion on the basis of a single case or a few cases, without ensuring that the sampling is sufficiently representative for the conclusion to be valid.
Personal attack (ad hominem argument): Attacking a person to undermine their credibility rather than their arguments.
Straw man argument: Twisting someone’s position or words, especially by exaggerating or simplifying them so that they do not seem credible.
Slippery slope: Claiming that an action will lead to a terrible outcome, based on cause and effect, that proves to be unlikely or impossible upon further examination.
“Two wrongs don’t make a right” argument: Attempting to justify behaviour by pointing out that others behave just as badly, if not worse.
Reference point: Resource from the social and cultural environment that is referred to in order to
enhance and inform ethical reflection. For the purposes of ethical reflection, there are different types of relevant reference points that cover different dimensions of the human experience: legal and regulatory, scientific, historical, artistic, technical, experiential (emotional, spiritual and practical, among others), moral, normative, religious, traditional, intellectual, etc.
Research strategy: All of the choices made regarding the method used to gather relevant information for the study of cultural realities. It includes the choice of a methodological approach (documentary research or empirical survey) and the research techniques used.
Social and cultural integration: The process by which an individual takes their place in the collective life of a society or group, particularly through family and friendship relationships, education, work, social commitment or civic participation.
Social change: A lasting change in the ways of thinking, feeling and acting that affects the social structures and norms that organize collective and individual life. Social change can result from the advent of an innovation (scientific or technological), changes in living conditions (for example, in relation to the environment), contacts between groups or the creative action of individuals or groups.
Social inclusion: Allowing all individuals, regardless of their characteristics and groups to
which they belong, to participate fully in political, economic and cultural life, to enjoy decent living conditions and to exercise their fundamental rights. Social inclusion is fostered by state measures that involve changing institutional norms and practices, formulating and enforcing laws, implementing public policies, etc.
Social inequalities: Unequal distribution of resources (e.g. economic, cultural, symbolic) and recognition within a society. Social inequalities particularly affect certain groups of people. There are various types of inequalities (e.g. socio-economic, sex, gender, ethnocultural) that are linked together in different combinations to form particular configurations, depending on the context. Public policies (e.g. laws, taxation, public services) can contribute to reducing inequalities or, conversely, to increasing them.
Social movement: A form of concerted collective action involving individuals and groups whose demands are aimed at a general transformation of society and the social order. Social movements are characterized by a collective identity and are indicative of social conflict.
Social relations: Series of direct or indirect interactions between people, groups or institutions. Social relations have historical depth, as each interaction is based on previous interactions and influences future interactions. They are central to the production of culture and to society. There are
various types of social relations, such as those that are cooperative, competitive, hierarchical, egalitarian, collaborative, conflicting, formal or informal.
Sociocognitive bias: Shortcut in thinking that allows information from the social and cultural environment to be rapidly analyzed and used.
Anchoring bias: Retaining a specific piece of information as a reference because it was the first acquired on a subject or it appears important at first glance.
Bias by omission: Considering that harm caused by action is worse than harm caused by inaction.
Confirmation bias: Giving more weight to information and sources that confirm a hypothesis.
Essentialism bias: Assuming the fixed, immutable or natural character of a trait, person, a group or a social phenomenon.
Halo effect: Making a general judgment that is usually positive about a person or thing based on the perception of a specific characteristic.
Repetition effect: Perceiving information as credible simply because it is repeated, at the expense of new information.
Social-desirability bias: Presenting oneself in a favourable light to other individuals.
Sociology: A social science that studies the relations between individuals and groups. It involves a critical approach to observation and analysis, which
clarifies the rules, norms, codes, meanings and social mechanisms that underpin cultural realities to examine presuppositions and spontaneous ideas.
Types of judgment:
Preference judgment: Statement in which the content expresses the approval of or a personal aversion to something (a preference).
Prescriptive judgment: Statement made in the form of a recommendation, an order or a suggestion that encourages an action, a change to a situation or a solution to a problem.
Reality judgment (or factual judgment): Statement of a finding intended to be plausible or true about observable facts, an event or a person’s account. A reality judgment may be false.
Value judgment: Statement prioritizing a norm, value, duty or moral obligation.
Types of knowledge: Types of knowledge are distinguished according to the process that produced them, for example philosophical reflection, scientific approach, religious belief, practical know-how and direct experience. Knowledge is all of the information recognized and shared by groups of people that is acquired through experience or study, and allows humans to make sense of the world and to live in it. At an individual level, knowledge is constructed in different ways.
Types of reasoning:
Deductive reasoning: Reasoning that involves applying a general rule to specific or unique situations.
Inductive reasoning: Reasoning that produces a general rule after observing various specific or unique situations with shared characteristics.
Reasoning by analogy: Reasoning that supports an idea by determining that two situations are alike, proportionate or equivalent because they share a sufficient number of similar characteristics.
Value: Quality attributed to things, attitudes or behaviours that serve as a moral reference to identify desirable behaviours. The meanings and importance assigned to values vary based on context.
ICONS
Curcuma : Sociological Approach, Ethical Approach, Direct observation, questionnaire, interview.
Interior pages
iStock.com / p. 164: young people in a cafeteria © Hispanolistic, 1411322814. Shutterstock.com / p. 7: adolescent with headphones © Ollyy, 86790025. p. 156: group of young people © Jose Calcina, 2436846845. p. 157: people in a meeting © klyaksun, 2183470883. p. 159: young people with backpacks © chronicler, 773688853; teacher in front of class © Monkey Business Images, 1332875000. p. 161: Gilbert © Inside Creative House, 2505339787; Kabir © insta_photos, 2192136373; Eve-Lyne © Wayhome Studio, 2408565635; Maude © VH-studio, 2408897357; Sylvain © stockfour, 1016723167; Véronique © Anelo, 2197757639; Gisèle © Image Point Fr, 174171395. p. 162: group of people, back view © oneinchpunch, 490906510. p. 163: donut, nuggets and fries © IDEA ROUTE, 2478397213. p. 165: salad © lilik ferri yanto, 2512542933. p. 166: tray with meal © Africa Studio, 1139822657. p. 169: shrimp, peanuts, eggs © New Africa, 1322462069. p. 178: funnel © SPF, 2301838831; person balancing with red and green balloons © kostasgr, 1961569669. p. 187: diverse silhouettes © melitas, 1857402163. p. 188: hands in conversation © Roman Samborskyi, 2357375783. p. 189: orange and yellow speech bubbles © Roman Samborskyi, 2357375783. p. 190: pointing hands © Roman Samborskyi, 2285057785. p. 191: pictograms (top to bottom): © chocolat-10, 2440624205; © chocolat-10, 2418376737; © mi-vector, 2383077379; © chocolat-10, 2418376737; © Rvector, 1790019863. p. 192: pictograms (top to bottom): © chocolat-10, 2440624205; © Rvector, 1790019863; © chocolat-10, 2440624205; © Fourleaflover, 2133348541; © Fourleaflover, 2079740932. p. 193: pictograms (top to bottom): © Uswa KDT, 1928826860; © Fourleaflover, 2079740932; © smx12, 2474395423; © Kida, 2000657552; © Realstockvector, 2456066677. p. 198: group selfie of teenagers © Jose Calsina, 2506806499.
The Citizens in Action collection, for the Secondary V course Culture and Citizenship in Québec, was created by a team attentive to the needs of students and teachers. Clear and comprehensive, it helps students develop the course’s two competencies while exploring engaging topics.
This collection includes:
A Reference Framework outlining the main elements of the program and the key concepts under study.
A Student Book divided in four sections, each made up of two parts, including:
• Starter activities
•Discussion guides
•Concepts and ideas defined and illustrated with examples
•A variety of materials (texts, audio and videos) to support learning
•Integrated tasks that encourage skill development
• Charts, diagrams and visuals illustrating the concepts and ideas under study
•Supplementary activities
A Teacher’s Guide including year-long lesson planning, teacher’s notes and reproducible worksheets.
Digital content to explore!
On myCECZone, you can access the components of the collection in digital format along with a wide range of additional resources:
• Videos featuring experts and different points of view on various subjects
• Audio files (podcasts, songs and more)
• Self-correcting exercises