Unit 1 · p.12 Family Matters

Morning, everyone. Before we open anything, a slightly uncomfortable question: the person you are right now, the way you argue, the way you share, or don't, how much of that did you choose?

Here's the warmer on the board. Who or what has had the most important influence on your personality? Parents, siblings, friends, school. One answer only. 不许端水。

Two minutes with your partner. And don't just name the influence. Tell me how it got into you.

I think my father has a very big influence to me, because he is very strict.

Strict dads, a classic. The idea's clear, the preposition isn't. Influence ON someone. And if you use it as a verb, there's no preposition at all: he influenced me. Run it again, and add the "how".

My father has had a huge influence on me. He never told me to be organised, but I grew up watching him plan everything, so now I can't start anything without a list.

That's the interesting bit. He didn't do it on purpose. You absorbed it. Who else picked something they absorbed rather than something they were taught?

Me. I picked my friends. I didn't decide to talk like them, but I definitely do now.

So the influence was invisible, until you looked back. Now push it further. If you'd grown up as an only child, or with three noisy brothers, would that same influence have worked on you in the same way?

Probably not. With three brothers my dad wouldn't have had time to be so strict with me.

Interesting: so the number of kids changes how the parents behave, which then changes you. Hold that thought. It'll come back in the article.

Now the video. The question is simple, but listen for one thing: when people say having a sibling is "good", good for whom? The child? The parents? The adult later?

播放 Get Thinking 视频 01。没有视频的班级跳过，直接进入下一句讨论。

So, good for whom?

Mostly for the child, I think. They said you learn to share and to deal with arguments.

That's one benefit. Did anyone hear a cost?

Someone said you have to compete for attention all the time.

Right, so even in two minutes of video, it's not one-sided. Last thing. Where do you stand right now? Option one: there's a real difference between only children and people with siblings. Option two: it's mostly a label, a box. Option three: it depends.

I think it's depend on the family.

"It depends" is a very C1 answer, and I respect it. Grammar check, though: depend is the verb, so there's no "is". It depends on the family. And now I'm going to be annoying: depends on WHAT about the family?

It depends on how the parents treat each child, and maybe on the age gap.

Much better, that's a position with a mechanism. Write your position on the board line: real difference, label, or it depends, plus one reason. At the end of the lesson I'll ask you again, and you'll need a better reason than "I feel like it".

Books open, page 12. Four photos. Before you read a single word, give me relationships, not descriptions. Photo A: who are these people to each other, and what's the give-away?

They're probably three generations of one family. The give-away is the older man and woman at the same table as the kids, and everyone's eating together.

"The give-away is…" Nice. Photo C?

Judging by their faces, they're probably sisters who've just had an argument. They've both got their arms crossed and they're looking away from each other.

Two teenagers, mutual silence. 冷战现场. And B?

Two parents and one girl. She might be an only child.

"Might be". Good, because a photo can't prove that. Now Exercise 1: six statements, four photos. Work out who might say each one. The skill here is the clue word. Number 1, "I love having so many brothers and sisters". Clue?

"So many", and "brothers and sisters". An adult would say "children", so it's one of the kids in D.

Number 2: "The kids all play together so well." Why can't a kid say this?

Because "the kids" sounds like someone outside the group. It's a parent or a grandparent in A.

Exactly, it's the view from the adult table. Number 3: "We tend to argue a lot, but that isn't such a bad thing."

Photo C. They're arguing, but she's saying it isn't a disaster.

Now, "tend to". If I say "I tend to overthink things", does that mean every single time?

No, it means it's my usual pattern, but not always.

Right. Give me one true pattern of yours. "I tend to… when…".

I tend to playing my phone when I should be studying.

Painfully relatable. Two things, though. After "tend to" it's the base verb, no -ing. And you play ON your phone, not "play your phone". Again?

I tend to play on my phone when I should be studying.

Number 4 is easy: "It's cool to be an only child". B, the girl. Now listen to number 5 with my voice. "My sister's ALWAYS teasing me." Compare: "My sister teases me." Which one is a complaint?

The first one. "Always" with the continuous makes it sound like it drives her crazy.

That's the 吐槽 tense. Your turn: one person, one annoying habit, full emotion.

My roommate is always forget to close the door!

I believe you, and I'm on your side. But "is always" needs the -ing form after it. Is always forgetting.

My roommate is always forgetting to close the door!

Better, and angrier. Number 6: "Maybe she needs a brother or sister." Is "she" the speaker?

No, someone's talking about her. It's the mum or dad in B, about their daughter.

So look: number 4 and number 6 are the same family. The girl says it's cool. The parents think she's missing something. Who's right?

You can't really say. It's her experience against their worry.

And that's our big question in miniature: is "only child" a real difference, or is it a box the parents are worried about?

Exercise 2. Groups of three or four. I'm not interested in the answers you agree on. Find the ones where you disagree, and settle them with evidence.

小组讨论 2 分钟，巡视，只听分歧点。

Group 2, you had a fight about number 5.

I put it under D, because there are lots of girls in D and one could be complaining about her sister.

I am not agree. She says she'd like a brother, but in D there are already brothers.

Strong evidence, and I like the energy. But "agree" is already a verb, so no "am". And at C1 we can disagree more elegantly: "I see where you're coming from, but…". Try it.

I see where you're coming from, but she says she'd like a brother as well, and the girls in D already have brothers. So it fits C much better.

See what happened? The photo evidence said "maybe D", the language evidence said "definitely not D". When they clash, which wins?

The language, because it's what the person actually says.

Fair. Now the Extension. Real people don't speak in single sentences. Add one more line to each statement, something that expands on the speaker's point of view.

Example. Number 2, the grandparent: "The kids all play together so well." What comes next?

They tend to sort out their own arguments before we even notice.

Lovely, and you slipped "tend to" in. That's the challenge: at least two of your six lines must use "tend to" or "is always -ing". Three minutes.

巡视。弱一点的同学可以只写 3 句，但必须用对结构；强的同学可以给每个人物加一个态度。

Game time. Read me only your new line. Everyone else, tell me the number and what gave it away.

She's always reading my messages over my shoulder.

Number 5! "Always reading" is a complaint, and it's about a sister.

Correct, and it sounded properly irritated. Another one?

She tends to spend too much time with adults.

Number 6. It's the parents worrying about the only child again.

Notice that? The parents' worry has a specific shape. Not "she's unhappy", but "she's around adults too much". Keep that in mind when we read what the researchers say.

So far we've been guessing from faces. Now let's see what the researchers think. But first, your own hypothesis. Exercise 3.

How might having or not having siblings affect our life and personality? Two predictions for each side. Write them in the table, one minute, alone.

I'd expect people with siblings to be better at negotiating, whereas only children might be more self-reliant.

Lovely contrast with "whereas". Where does that come from? Something you've seen, or something you've heard?

Seen. My cousin has two brothers and she can talk her way out of anything.

Good. Someone with a prediction that's more "heard" than "seen"?

Only children are tend to be spoiled. Everybody says this.

Ah, "everybody says". Hold on to that, because that's exactly what the next page will attack. But first the grammar: "tend" is the verb, so no "are". Only children tend to be spoiled.

Only children tend to be spoiled. But to be honest I've only heard it, I haven't really seen it.

Thank you for the honesty. Put a little H next to it in your table: heard, not seen.

把几个预测写到黑板上，标出 seen / heard。

Now, page 13. Two minutes, and you are NOT reading every word. This is skimming. Read the title, the five headings, and the first line of the last paragraph. You're looking for the overall message.

计时 2 分钟。

Stop. From the headings alone, what are the five claims?

Siblings make you smarter, younger siblings teach empathy, siblings help you manage relationships, they bring mental health benefits, and they make you physically healthier.

Five headings, five advantages. So is this article neutral?

Not really. The headings are all positive about having siblings.

And yet, what's the tone of the very end? Find the last paragraph.

It says it isn't easy to make definite claims in an area as complex as this.

So the headings sell, and the ending hedges. 标题党 at the top, 免责声明 at the bottom. Which of your predictions got a tick?

"Better at negotiating" is in there, under relationships. "Self-reliant" isn't.

The article has a big affect on my opinion. Now I think siblings are better.

It changed your mind in two minutes. That's quick! One spelling trap, though: the noun is effect with an E. Affect is the verb. So either "it has a big effect on me" or "it affects my opinion".

The article has had an effect on my opinion, but I want to read it properly before I decide.

That's the right instinct. Let's read it properly.

Before the deep read, eight words you'll need for the article. Some you know, some you half-know. Let's turn half-knowing into knowing.

"Categorised." The article says "many people dislike any suggestion that human beings can be easily categorised". Any of you been categorised recently? MBTI, 星座, i 人 e 人?

Everyone! I'm an INFJ, apparently.

"Apparently." Love it. So, categorised means…?

Put into a group or a type, usually by someone else.

"Psychology": careful, the p is silent. Sy-KOL-o-gy. "Consensus": not everyone agrees, but most do. If ninety percent of researchers say X, we have a consensus.

So there is a common consensus that siblings are good.

Nearly perfect, but "common consensus" says the same thing twice. Consensus already means shared agreement. Just: there's a consensus that…, or the general consensus is…

The general consensus seems to be that it's better to have siblings.

And notice "seems to be". The writer's hedging even there. "Empathy" and "traits" you probably know. Give me a trait of yours that you think is permanent.

I'm stubborn. I think that's a trait I'll carry into adulthood.

"Carry over into adulthood", that's the article's phrase, well spotted. Now, "insecure".

Insecure means not safe, like a dangerous place.

Good guess from the parts, in-secure. But that's "unsafe". Insecure is about the inside of a person: not confident, unsure of yourself. An insecure adult is constantly worried what others think.

So someone who always needs other people to tell them they're doing OK is insecure.

Exactly. "Clear-cut": simple and definite. Is the answer to our big question clear-cut?

Not so far.

Last one: IQ. Culture note. Your IQ is your mental age score, divided by your real age, times a hundred. About two-thirds of people score between 85 and 115. Only around two and a half percent go above 130.

But here's the catch: IQ is linked to nutrition, money at home, even the environment before birth. So when the article says older siblings "tend to" have a higher IQ, why can't it say "always"?

Because birth order is only one factor among many. You can't separate it from everything else.

Beautiful. That's the mindset we need for the gapped sentences.

领读 8 个词，重点纠 psychology 的 p 不发音、consensus 的重音在第二音节。

Exercise 4. Six gaps, eight sentences, two fakes. The fakes are designed to share a topic with a paragraph. So if you match by topic, you'll fall for them. We're going to match by hooks.

Let's do A together. Before the gap: "Many people dislike any suggestion that human beings can be easily categorised." After the gap: "But whether we like it or not, we all fall into one of these two categories." What job does the missing sentence do?

It explains why people dislike being categorised. So it's a reason.

Which sentence is built to give a reason?

Number 5, "After all, people are complex and see themselves in that way." "After all" introduces a reason.

And "that way" points to…?

Being complex. Not easy to put in a box.

Both sides fit: they dislike boxes, after all they're complex, but whether we like it or not, we're in a box. Now gap B. Before: "Many researchers in human psychology have attempted to answer these questions." Find a plural pronoun.

Number 8: "Their findings do not provide us with a very clear-cut answer." "Their" means the researchers.

And check the other side. After the gap: "But, overall, the consensus seems to be that it's better to have siblings." Does "But" make sense after "no clear-cut answer"?

Yes. No clear answer, but most of them agree on one thing.

Now the trap. Gap E, in the health section. Before it, kids copy how their brothers and sisters eat, more so than they copy their parents.

I chose 3, because this paragraph is about health and sentence 3 says "unhealthy".

And that's exactly the trap they built for you. Same topic, so it feels right. But test the hook. "This is not to say that an only child will be unhealthy." What's "this"? Did the sentence before say only children are unhealthy?

No, it's about copying brothers and sisters, not about only children at all.

So "this" has nothing to grab. Which sentence picks up "more than their parents"?

Number 4. "They have a role model who is more or less their own age, rather than an adult one." "Rather than an adult" matches "more so than they copy their parents".

There it is. Match the hook, not the topic word. 别一看到 healthy 就上头. You've got C, D and F in pairs. Circle the hook, check both sides, and decide which two are fakes. Four minutes.

巡视。卡住的组只问一句："What does this word point back to, and does the next sentence still make sense?"

Before I say anything, listen to the full article and check.

播放音频 1.01。

Answers: A5, B8, C7, D1, E4, F2. Fakes: 3 and 6. Justify C.

Before C, first-borns have all their parents' attention. After it, "Interestingly, it also discovered…" so there's more to the study. "But that's only part of the story" links them.

And D?

D starts a new section, so it needs a topic sentence. Number 1 introduces social skills, and then "Here, it's a case of the more siblings, the better."

So the more siblings you have, the more better you are at relationships.

You've got the idea perfectly. The structure is "the more…, the better", and "better" is already a comparative, so no "more" in front of it. Say the article's version and then your own.

The more siblings, the better. And for me: the more I argue with my brother, the better I get at winning arguments.

Ha! And why is 6 a fake?

It talks about an only-child advantage, but gap C is about first-borns, not only children.

Exactly: tempting, wrong group. And F?

"This question" is "whether or not siblings are a good thing", and number 2 says future research will explain it.

So look at the shape of the whole article: five confident headings, and three sentences, 5, 8 and 2, all quietly saying "it's complicated". That's hedging, and it's going to matter in Exercise 5.

The researchers have had their say. Now you're the data. Exercise 5. Hands up if you're an only child. OK, quite a few. Then you'll test the research on a parent, an aunt, an uncle. Everyone has someone.

Take one minute alone first. Choose one finding from the article and one real person. Make notes, don't write sentences yet.

Mixed-ability：同水平同学两两一组；基础弱的给 1 分钟思考时间再开口。

Now talk. Use the frame: "The article claims that… In my family, that seems to hold, or doesn't really hold, because…".

The article claims that younger siblings teach older ones empathy. In my family that seems to hold. My brother is six years younger, and since he was born I've had to be much more patient.

Lovely. Now the C1 question: is that proof, or could something else explain it?

It could just as easily be down to growing up. Maybe I'd be more patient now anyway, at seventeen.

"It could just as easily be down to…" That's the move of a careful thinker. Someone with a finding that doesn't fit?

I'm an only child, but I have a brother, he's my uncle's son. We grew up together.

I know exactly what you mean: in Chinese he's your 哥哥. But in English, your uncle's son is your cousin. You can say "he's like a brother to me".

I'm an only child, but my cousin's like a brother to me. We tend to fight like real brothers, and he's always borrowing my stuff without asking.

Both structures in one go, 漂亮. So does the article's claim fit your situation?

Not really. The article says only children miss out on learning to manage relationships, but I learned all of that with my cousin.

So: the research is wrong?

Yes, the research is wrong, because my experience contradicts with it.

That's a brave conclusion. Two things. "Contradict" takes a direct object, no "with": my experience contradicts it. And is one cousin enough to make a study of hundreds of people wrong?

No. My experience contradicts it, but that doesn't make the research wrong. It just means there are exceptions, like the article says.

That's what the writer meant by "that said". Second question. How important is it, really, whether you're an only child or have siblings? Compare it with something else.

Compared with parents, I'd say it matters surprisingly little. Parents decide how much attention you get, whether you have siblings or not.

I disagree a bit. I'd say it matters a great deal, because you spend thousands of hours with a sibling. You can't ignore that.

Both positions, both with a mechanism. Last thing: look at your position from the warmer. Real difference, label, or it depends? Who's moved?

I've moved from "real difference" to "it depends". There seem to be some real patterns, but the article itself admits it isn't clear-cut.

Last five minutes, and nobody leaves without a ticket.

Answer the big question in writing: real difference, label, or it depends. Three or four sentences. One finding from the article, one real person.

The checklist is on the board: "tend to", "always -ing", a hedge, and one word from today. Which hedges did we collect?

Seems to, arguably, that said, and it could be down to.

Good. Start with your position, then your evidence, then your "that said". Three minutes.

学生写 3 分钟，然后和同桌交换，按 checklist 打勾。

Swap. Check four things. Is there a base verb after "tend to"? Is there an "is" or "are" before "always"? Is there a hedge? Is there a word from today?

She wrote "my brother always borrowing my charger". I think it's OK.

Read it again with your teacher's eyes. Something small is missing in the middle.

Oh, "is". My brother is always borrowing my charger.

Exactly. Who wants to read theirs out?

I'd say there are some real patterns, but the answer is far from clear-cut. The article claims that younger siblings teach older ones empathy, and that seems to hold for my mum. That said, my uncle, the youngest, is always interrupting people!

Position, evidence, hedge, and a joke at your uncle's expense. Perfect.

Today: you gave photos a voice, you put six sentences back by following hooks, and you learned that even a confident article ends with "it's complicated". Next lesson we ask: if a study says one thing and your family says another, who do you believe?