{"CACHEDAT":"2026-06-05 07:46:01","SLUG":"2026-04-18-train-the-trainer-0Q6SqKRM9X","MARKDOWN":"![](/api/attachments.redirect?id=01e62c68-991a-47bb-8e6e-1ff28b7fb85d \" =4173x2155\")\n\n\n# `D1` Open up your mind\n\n## ==Understand how information reaches people==\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G1O1` Distinguish the variety of information environments through which people actively seek out, routinely access, or encounter information in passing.\n\n* `D1G1O1H1` List online and offline ☑ information environments — i.e. places, platforms, media, and situations in which people encounter information that shapes their beliefs and actions.\n* `D1G1O1H2` Differentiate between information search & discovery systems, digital information channels and platforms, and analogue media & information environments.\n* Categorise ☑ information channels according to type or ☑ source category.\n* `D1G1O1H3` Compare ☑ information channels in terms of content-publication openness and navigation patterns.\n* Identify ☑ barriers to access in different information environments → e.g. paywalls, language level, technical requirements, disability access.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G1O2` Describe the role of artificial amplification in shaping the visibility of information items within – and sometimes across – information environments.\n\n* `D1G1O2H1` Distinguish between ☑ social bots and ☑ trolls, ☑ bot farms, ☑ troll farms, and ☑ click farms.\n* `D1G1O2H2` Identify ☑ typical indicators of social bot and troll activity.\n* `D1G1O2H3` Explain the effects of artificial amplification on the perceived popularity, relevance, and reach of information within an information channel.\n* `D1G1O2H4` Explain the phenomenon of spill-over effects.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G1O3` Describe the influence of publishers and other users on the prominence of information within information environments.\n\n* `D1G1O3H1` Explain the role of ☑ search engine optimisation (SEO) in shaping search results.\n\n\n* `D1G1O3H2` Investigate the role of editorial curation in ☑ discovery feeds and directories — who selects, what criteria apply, and what becomes visible as a result.\n* `D1G1O3H2` Explain trending and virality as mechanisms that increase the prominence of information through collective user behaviour.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G1O4` Describe the effect of algorithmic personalisation on the visibility of information items to individual users.\n\n* `D1G1O1H1` Identify types of ☑ user actions that feed algorithmic selection.\n\n\n* `D1G1O1H2` Explain differences in search results or content feeds between users on the same platform.\n* `D1G1O1H2` Compare search results or content recommendations for the same SSI topic across different digital information spaces.\n\n:::\n\n##  ==Check who is behind the information==\n\n\n:::tip\n### Distinguish different source categories and the primary interests of their typical authors and publishers.\n\n* List different ☑ source categories.\n* Describe the ☑ primary interests of typical authors and publishers in each source category.\n* Compare ☑ typical communicative intentions across source categories. \n* Compare ☑ pre-publication review practices across source categories.\n* Give examples of sources whose reliability does not match the expectation created by their source category.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Identify the source behind an information item.\n\n* Identify the ☑ author or creator of the information item.\n* Identify the ☑ publisher or outlet that made the information item publicly available.\n* Identify the ☑ distributor, if any, through which the information item reached you.\n* Determine the ☑ degree of mediation between the information item and the original information.\n* Classify the source in terms of its ☑ general category.\n* Investigate the typical audience of a given information source.\n* Analyse how the information item is tailored to its intended audience in terms of language, complexity, ☑ selection of content, ☑ framing, etc.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Evaluate the source's trustworthiness through lateral reading.\n\n* Research the ☑ author's expertise and credentials in new browser tabs.\n* Research the ☑ reputation of the publisher or outlet in new browser tabs.\n\n:::\n\n## ==Find more than what finds you== \n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G1O5` Recognise that the information people encounter about an SSI may only show part of the picture.\n\n* `D1G1O1H1` Explain the concepts of ☑ echo chamber and ☑ filter bubble.\n* Identify ☑ barriers to access in different information environments → e.g. paywalls, language level, technical requirements, disability access.\n* `D1G1O1H1` Analyse gaps in a person's use of information environments that may limit their basis for forming an informed opinion on an SSI.\n* Explain how tailoring an information item to a specific audience may result in a selective or incomplete representation of the SSI.\n\n\n* `D1G1O1H2` Suggest concrete steps for broadening the range of information environments used for a specific SSI topic.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G2O1` Select suitable information environments for a specific SSI search.\n\n* `D1G2O1H1` Identify the specific aspect of the SSI to investigate.\n* `D1G2O1H2` Assess your existing knowledge about the SSI.\n* `D1G2O1H3` Break down the SSI into key terms for your search.\n* Match the information need to appropriate types of information environments.\n* Justify the selection of specific information environments for the search purpose.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G2O1` Formulate tailored search queries for the selected information environments.\n\n* `D1G2O1H1` Adapt ☑ search queries to the specific features of the selected information environment.\n* `D1G2O1H1`Refine ☑ search queries based on initial results.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Diversify the search across different information environments, queries, and source categories.\n\n* Identify source categories or information environments not yet covered in the search.\n* Reformulate queries to reach different types of sources.\n\n:::\n\n## `D1G4` ==Pause before you click==\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D1G2O1` Evaluate the relevance of search results or feed posts before engaging with them.\n\n* `D1G2O1H1` Assess the topical match between a search result or post and the information need.\n* Assess the currency and source of a search result or post.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n**Identify features designed to attract attention and prompt engagement.**\n\n* Identify ☑ emotionally charged language in titles, headlines, or snippets.\n* Identify features of emotionally charged, sensationalised, or oversimplified presentation — including clickbait, memes, short formats.\n* Identify mismatches between images and headlines or snippets.\n* Identify ☑ content formats that prioritise engagement over completeness.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n**Identify markers of commercial or promotional intent.**\n\n* Identify ad labels, sponsored content markers, and other meta-tags.\n* Analyse visual and textual cues indicating sponsored content.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n**Recognise labels and surface features that signal the need for caution.**\n\n* Explain why labels such as \"breaking news\" or \"AI-generated\" signal the need for caution before engaging with the information item.\n* Explain why a professional-looking surface does not indicate trustworthiness.\n* Distinguish between reputable-looking domains or and actually trustworthy source\n* Recognise the tailoring of surface features to the intended audience of an information item..\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n**Verify the authenticiy and original context of visual content.**\n\n* Explain the concepts of ☑ cheap fakes and ☑ deep fakes.\n\n\n* Verify the authenticity of displayed images using ☑ verification tools.\n* Verify the authenticity of displayed videos using ☑ verification tools.\n* Verify the original context of an image or video using ☑ reverse image search.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n**Analyse the relationship between the packaging of information and its intended audience.**\n\n* Identify ☑ visual, ☑ linguistic, and ☑ auditory features that signal a specific target audience.\n* Explain the function of surface elements in prompting the target audience to engage.\n\n:::\n\n## ==Understand why this matters==\n\n\n:::tip\nExplain why anyone - irrespective of intelligence or education - is susceptible to encountering and sharing misinformation.\n\n* Distinguish between misinformation and disinformation.\n* Explain why the boundary between misinformation and disinformation is often difficult to determine in practice.\n* Identify cognitive factors that make people susceptible to misinformation → e.g. ☑ confirmation bias, ☑ repetition effect, ☑ emotional reasoning.\n* Identify situational factors that increase susceptibility → e.g. time pressure, information overload, trust in the sender.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\nExamine the consequences of selective or misleading information for individual decision-making, social cohesion, and democratic participation.\n\n* Explain the importance of being aware of circulating misinformation for a full picture of an SSI.\n* Describe effects of misleading information on individual decision-making → e.g. distorted health choices, consumer decisions, voting behaviour.\n* Describe effects of misleading information on social cohesion → e.g. polarisation, manufactured consensus, normalisation of false claims, loss of common ground.\n* Describe effects of misleading information on democratic participation → e.g. erosion of trust in institutions, voter manipulation, undermining of independent oversight.\n\n:::\n\n# `D2` Be wise & think twice\n\n## ==Skim before you scan==\n\n\n:::tip\n### Assess the relevance of the information item for the SSI investigation.\n\n* dentify mismatches between what the headline, snippet, or thumbnail promised and what the content delivers.\n* Determine whether the content addresses the specific aspect of the SSI under investigation.\n* Determine whether the content adds a new perspective beyond what you know or what has already been found.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Assess the range of perspectives presented in the information item.\n\n* Classify the content as one-sided or multi-perspective.\n * H5P Inés\n* Identify which ☑ perspectives or positions are represented.\n* Identify which ☑ perspectives or positions are absent.\n\n:::\n\n## ==Scan before you trust==\n\n\n:::tip\n### Cross-check the claim.\n\n* Identify the claim.\n* Check whether the claim has been reviewed on fact-checking websites.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Distinguish between unsupported and justified claims (C vs. CER). \n\n* Identify the ☑ evidence or the lack thereof.\n* Identify the ☑ reasoning or the lack thereof.\n* Classify the claim as unsupported (C) or justified (CER).\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Evaluate the relevance of the evidence in relation to the claim. \n\n* Specify the scope and assertion of the claim.\n* Assess the topical fit: whether the evidence addresses the same subject matter as the claim.\n* Assess the scope fit: whether the evidence addresses the same conditions, time frame, or population as the claim.\n* Assess the logical fit: whether the evidence supports the specific assertion made in the claim.\n* Assess the temporal fit: whether the evidence is current.\n* Classify the evidence as relevant, partially relevant, or irrelevant.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Verify the reliability of the evidence based on scientific knowledge.\n\n* Identify the source of the evidence within the information item.\n* Assess the methodological quality of the evidence, e.g. sample size, representativeness, data type, limitations.\n* Examine whether the data are reported without distortion, omission, or misinterpretation.\n* Assess whether numerical evidence is contextualised with an appropriate baseline, denominator, or comparison.\n* Classify the evidence as reliable, partially reliable, or unreliable.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Analyse the coherence of the reasoning connecting evidence and claim.\n\n* `D2G1O4H1` Specify the assumptions underlying the reasoning.\n* `D2G1O4H2` Assess whether the reasoning logically connects the evidence to the claim.\n* `D2G1O4H3` Examine whether the reasoning avoids ☑ logical fallacies.\n* `D2G1O4H4` Classify the reasoning as coherent, partially coherent, or incoherent.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D2G1O5` Evaluate the overall strength of the argument.\n\n* `D2G1O4H1` Integrate the relevance, reliability, and coherence assessments.\n* `D2G1O4H2` Assess the argument's strength base on the quality of their supporting evidence and reasoning.\n* `D2G1O4H2` Classify the argument as fully justified, partially justified, poorly justified.\n\n:::\n\n## ==Follow the thread==\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D2G3O2` Identify the viewpoint of the information item.\n\n* `D2G3O2H1` Identify the SSI-question the information item addresses.\n* Identify the viewpoint, whether it is a binary position (yes/no) or a qualified stance (with conditions, scope, or limits).\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### **Map the arguments to the viewpoint.**\n\n* Identify supporting arguments, i.e. arguments that explain why the viewpoint holds.\n* Identify limiting arguments, i.e. arguments that define when or where the viewpoint does not hold.\n* Identify weighing arguments, i.e. arguments that justify why one side prevails.\n* Identify counter-arguments, i.e. arguments against the viewpoint, which presented externally or acknowledged internally within the viewpoint.\n* Classify the argumentation as linear, dual-perspective, or rebuttal-based.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### **Assess the coherence of the overall argumentation.**\n\n* Assess whether all arguments support the overall viewpoint.\n* Identify contradictions or logical breaks within the argumentation.\n* Classify the argumentation as coherent, partially coherent, or incoherent.\n\n:::\n\n## `D2G2` ==Read between the lines==\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D2G2O1` Identify framing and rhetorical devices.\n\n* `D2G2O1H1` Identify framing choices, → e.g. which aspects are foregrounded, which are backgrounded, which metaphors structure the message.\n* `D2G2O1H2` Identify rhetorical devices, → e.g. repetition, parallelism, rhetorical questions, loaded comparisons.\n* `D2G2O1H3` Identify sensational and emotional language, → e.g. superlatives, fear/outrage words, dramatic imagery, urgency cues.\n* Identify manipulative use of imagery, → e.g. selective framing of photos, emotionally charged images, mismatched illustrations, misleading graphs or charts.\n* Identify manipulative use of sound, → e.g. dramatic music, emotionally charged voice tone, selective audio cues.\n* `D2G2O1H4` Identify mismatches between textual, visual, and auditory elements within the information item.\n\n### `D2G2O2` Identify deceptive tactics.\n\n* `D2G2O2H1` Identify omissions, i.e. relevant information that is left out.\n* Identify fabrications, i.e. invented facts, quotes, or data.\n* Identify misrepresentations, i.e. real facts distorted or taken out of context.\n* Identify one-sided presentations that are disguised as neutral reporting.\n\n:::\n\n## ==Zoom out==: Locate the information item in its context and intended reception.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D2G2O3` Identify the purpose and motives behind the information item.\n\n* Identify the geographical, cultural, and/or political context in which the information item was created.\n* Determine the purpose of the information item based on its ☑ source category.\n* Identify potential motives of the author or distributor, e.g. financial benefit, political gain, reputation, ideological commitment.\n* Identify who might benefit from the information being believed or spread.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Analyse the tailoring of the information item to its likely target audiences.\n\n* Identify likely target audiences of the information item.\n* Analyse the adaptation of content complexity to the audiences.\n* Analyse the adaptation of linguistic features to the audiences.\n* Analyse the adaptation of visual features to the audiences.\n* Analyse the adaptation of auditory features to the audiences.\n\n:::\n\n# `D3` Make up your mind \n\n## ==Check the science==: Evaluate empirical claims about the SSI against the current scientific knowledge base.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G2O1` Assess the degree of scientific consensus on empirical claims related to the SSI.\n\n* `D3G2O1H2` Distinguish between central superordinate claims and subordinate ones addressing specific aspects.\n * *Human activities contribute to global warming. vs. The magnitude of warming by 2100 will be X–Y degrees.*\n* `D3G2O1H2` Compare findings from multiple scientific sources addressing the same claim.\n * *Search for meta-analyses or systematic reviews.*\n * *Identify official position statements from globally recognised scientific bodies.*\n * *Look for large-scale expert surveys.*\n* `D3G1O1H2` Determine the degree of expert agreement on each claim.\n * *Assess the ratio of peer-reviewed literature.*\n * *Use tools like Google Scholar / Web of Scientce to see if the dissenting view is represented in 1% or 40% of published papers.*\n * ==Maria E==\n* `D3G1O1H2` Classify claims as strongly established, moderately established, or contested.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G1O2` Summarise the established scientific knowledge on the SSI.\n\n* `D3G1O1H1` Identify the mechanisms described in authoritative scientific sources that experts agree on.\n* `D3G1O1H1` Organise findings in a coherent overview.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G1O2` Analyse the scope of scientific uncertainty on the SSI.\n\n* `D3G1O1H1` Classify types of uncertainty where data exist but experts disagree, e.g. incomplete data, model limitations, competing interpretations, limited expert discussions.\n* `D3G1O1H1` Identify unresolved questions where data is currently missing.\n* `D3G1O1H2` Explain the effect of uncertainty on the interpretation of evidence.\n\n:::\n\n## `D3G2` ==Map the full picture==: Analyse the multidimensional nature of the SSI.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G2O2` Analyse the controversy and its stakeholders.\n\n* `D3G2O2H2` Characterise the nature of the controversy – scientific, ethical, political, economic, cultural, or mixed.\n* `D3G2O2H3` Identify decision-makers and regulatory actors.\n* Identify stakeholder groups active in the SSI discourse, including nature and future generations as stakeholders represented by human advocates.\n* Identify the interests, values, and ☑ perspectives – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific – that each stakeholder group brings into the discourse.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Analyse main drivers behind the SSI.\n\n* `D3G2O2H2` Identify the main drivers behind the SSI across the different [☑](https://wiki.scilmi.eu/doc/make-up-your-mind-xWFLDEKwb8#h-checklist) perspectives.\n* `D3G2O2H3` Select the perspectives most relevant for the discussion of this SSI.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G2O1` Analyse the impacts of the SSI.\n\n* `D3G2O1H1` Identify impacts across the relevant perspectives.\n* `D3G2O1H1` Distinguish short-term and long-term impacts.\n* `D3G2O1H1` Distinguish local and global impacts.\n* `D3G2O1H2` Distinguish positive and negative impacts.\n* Map the effects of the impacts on each stakeholder group.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G2O2` Analyse proposed responses to the SSI.\n\n* `D3G2O2H2` Identify proposed ☑ policy measures. \n* `D3G2O2H3` Identify technological alternatives.\n* `D3G2O2H2` Identify ☑ nature-based solutions.\n* `D3G2O2H3` Identify proposed behavioural or societal changes.\n* `D3G2O2H3` Compare proposed responses in terms of feasibility. \n* Compare proposed responses in terms of their impacts on the different stakeholder groups.\n\n:::\n\n## D3G3 ==Trace the voices==: Evaluate existing viewpoints by analysing the trade-offs between perspectives in the SSI discourse.\n\n\n:::tip\n### Collect viewpoints on the SSI across stakeholders.\n\n* Identify viewpoints expressed by different stakeholder groups.\n* Identify evidence-based arguments supporting each viewpoint.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G1O1` Analyse viewpoints against the scientific knowledge base.\n\n* `D3G1O1H2` Identify omissions in how the viewpoints represent established knowledge and uncertainty.\n* Identify exaggerations in how the viewpoints represent established knowledge and uncertainty.\n* `D3G1O1H3` Assess whether the viewpoints proportionally represent the degree of scientific certainty and uncertainty.\n* `D3G1O1H4` Classify the viewpoints as strongly aligned, partially aligned, or weakly aligned with the current scientific knowledge base.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G1O1` Analyse the trade-offs between perspectives embodied by each viewpoint.\n\n* `D3G2O1H1` Identify the perspectives a viewpoint prioritises – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n* Identify the perspectives a viewpoint deprioritises or ignores – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n* Compare how different viewpoints prioritise and deprioritise perspectives differently.\n\n:::\n\n## `D3G4` ==Take your stand==: Form your position on the SSI with clarity about the basis of your reasoning.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G4O1` Clarify your own values and concerns regarding the SSI.\n\n* `D3G4O1H1` Identify your personal relation to the SSI. \n* Identify personal needs and interests that affect your position. \n* Identify the values you want to guide your reasoning on this SSI.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### **Form your position by weighing evidence, values, and trade-offs.**\n\n* Weigh the scientific evidence against your personal needs and interests.\n* Weigh the trade-offs across the perspectives – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n* Formulate your position, whether a binary position (yes/no) or a qualified viewpoint (with conditions, scope, or limits).\n* Identify the basis of your position: intuition, critically analysed information, or scientific knowledge.\n* Acknowledge the resulting quality of your position: an unexamined opinion, a critically informed position, or a scientifically substantiated judgement.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### Situate your position within the SSI discourse.\n\n* Identify the alignment of your position with existing viewpoints.\n* Identify the representation of your position in the public discourse.\n* Review opposing arguments and their evidence.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D3G4O2` Reassess your position when new information or arguments emerge.\n\n* `D3G4O2H1` Monitor new scientific findings and developments on the SSI. \n* Revise your position when the basis for change is strong enough.\n\n:::\n\n# `D4` Speak out and take action\n\n## `D4G1` ==Plan your civic engagement==: Develop a strategy to address the SSI through civic action.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G1O1` Identify needs and opportunities for engagement.\n\n* `D4G1O1H1` Identify the needs of yourself, your family, your friends, your school, the local community or broader society with regard to the pertinent socio-scientific issue.\n* `D4G1O1H1` Identify the impact of your needs on other ☑ stakeholders.\n* `D4G1O1H2` Identify gaps in existing efforts addressing these needs.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G1O2` Determine the purpose of your engagement.\n\n* `D4G1O2H1` Define the impact you want to achieve.\n* Determine the recipient(s) or target group(s) of your civic engagement.\n* H3: Weigh the potential effect of different forms of engagement — inform, argue, or act.\n* `D4G1O2H2` Select the type of civic engagement you would like to take — inform, argue, or act.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G1O3` Select the most appropriate information environment for your engagement.\n\n* `D4G1O3H1`☑ Match the information environment to your recipient(s) or target group(s).\n* Match the information environment to the type of engagement.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G1O4` Anticipate feedback and reactions.\n\n* `D4G1O4H1` Review similar initiatives to understand common feedback and reactions.\n* `D4G1O4H2` Simulate the engagement with peers.\n* `D4G1O4H3` Prepare responses to likely objections.\n\n:::\n\n## `D4G2` ==Inform==: Communicate established viewpoints on an SSI objectively.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G2O1` Tailor your message to the target audience.\n\n* `D4G2O1H1` Assess the audience's previous knowledge of the SSI.\n* Adapt the ☑ content complexity to the audience.\n* `D4G2O1H2` Adapt ☑ linguistic features to the audience.\n* Adapt ☑ visual features to the audience.\n* Adapt ☑ auditory features to the audience.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G2O2` Present opposing viewpoints transparently.\n\n* `D4G2O2H1` Organise the ☑ arguments and supporting ☑ evidence for each viewpoint.\n* `D4G2O2H2` Report facts and provide context.\n* `D4G2O2H3` Refer to ☑ sources.\n\n:::\n\n## `D4G3` ==Argue==: Communicate your own viewpoint on the SSI persuasively.\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G3O1` Define your [message.]()\n\n* `D4G3O1H1` Formulate a clear statement on the SSI in a single sentence.\n* `D4G3O1H2` Identify a hook to grab the recipients' attention.\n* `D4G3O1H3` Provide background information on the SSI.\n* Select arguments that support your message.\n* Select supporting evidence for each argument.\n* `D4G3O1H4` Build the argumentative chain from evidence via arguments to the message.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G2O1` Tailor your message to the target audience.\n\n* `D4G2O1H1` Assess the audience's previous knowledge of the SSI.\n* Adapt the ☑ content complexity to the audience.\n* `D4G2O1H2` Adapt ☑ linguistic features to the audience.\n* Adapt ☑ visual features to the audience.\n* Adapt ☑ auditory features to the audience.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\n### `D4G3O3` Address counter-arguments.\n\n==H5P (Sini)==\n\n* `D4G3O3H1` Identify likely counter-arguments.\n* `D4G3O3H2` Research evidence and reasoning behind the counter-arguments.\n* `D4G3O3H3` Evaluate their relevance and validity.\n* `D4G3O3H4` Develop responses and alternative arguments.\n\n:::\n\n## `D4G4` ==Act as a responsible democratic citizen==: Execute your engagement and evaluate its impact.\n\n\n:::tip\nO1: Prepare the execution.\n\n* Outline concrete steps and a timeline. \n* Identify resources and support needed. \n* Define success criteria before acting.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\nCarry out the engagement.\n\n* Execute the engagement according to the plan. \n* Adapt the execution to unforeseen circumstances.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\nEvaluate the impact.\n\n* Observe and document reactions and effects. \n* Compare observed outcomes with the defined success criteria.\n\n:::\n\n\n:::tip\nReflect on your engagement.\n\n* Identify what worked and what did not. \n* Derive lessons for future engagement.\n\n:::","HTML":"

\"\"

\n

D1Open up your mind

\n

Understand how information reaches people

\n
\n
\n\n

D1G1O1Distinguish the variety of information environments through which people actively seek out, routinely access, or encounter information in passing.

\n
    \n
  • D1G1O1H1List online and offline ☑ information environments — i.e. places, platforms, media, and situations in which people encounter information that shapes their beliefs and actions.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H2Differentiate between information search & discovery systems, digital information channels and platforms, and analogue media & information environments.\n
    • \n
  • Categorise ☑ information channels according to type or ☑ source category.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H3Compare ☑ information channels in terms of content-publication openness and navigation patterns.\n
    • \n
  • Identify ☑ barriers to access in different information environments → e.g. paywalls, language level, technical requirements, disability access.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D1G1O2Describe the role of artificial amplification in shaping the visibility of information items within – and sometimes across – information environments.

\n
    \n
  • D1G1O2H1Distinguish between ☑ social bots and ☑ trolls, ☑ bot farms, ☑ troll farms, and ☑ click farms.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O2H2Identify ☑ typical indicators of social bot and troll activity.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O2H3Explain the effects of artificial amplification on the perceived popularity, relevance, and reach of information within an information channel.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O2H4Explain the phenomenon of spill-over effects.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D1G1O3Describe the influence of publishers and other users on the prominence of information within information environments.

\n
    \n
  • D1G1O3H1Explain the role of ☑ search engine optimisation (SEO) in shaping search results.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O3H2Investigate the role of editorial curation in ☑ discovery feeds and directories — who selects, what criteria apply, and what becomes visible as a result.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O3H2Explain trending and virality as mechanisms that increase the prominence of information through collective user behaviour.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D1G1O4Describe the effect of algorithmic personalisation on the visibility of information items to individual users.

\n
    \n
  • D1G1O1H1Identify types of ☑ user actions that feed algorithmic selection.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H2Explain differences in search results or content feeds between users on the same platform.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H2Compare search results or content recommendations for the same SSI topic across different digital information spaces.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Check who is behind the information

\n
\n
\n\n

Distinguish different source categories and the primary interests of their typical authors and publishers.

\n
    \n
  • List different ☑ source categories.\n
    • \n
  • Describe the ☑ primary interests of typical authors and publishers in each source category.\n
    • \n
  • Compare ☑ typical communicative intentions across source categories.\n
    • \n
  • Compare ☑ pre-publication review practices across source categories.\n
    • \n
  • Give examples of sources whose reliability does not match the expectation created by their source category.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Identify the source behind an information item.

\n
    \n
  • Identify the ☑ author or creator of the information item.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the ☑ publisher or outlet that made the information item publicly available.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the ☑ distributor, if any, through which the information item reached you.\n
    • \n
  • Determine the ☑ degree of mediation between the information item and the original information.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the source in terms of its ☑ general category.\n
    • \n
  • Investigate the typical audience of a given information source.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse how the information item is tailored to its intended audience in terms of language, complexity, ☑ selection of content, ☑ framing, etc.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Evaluate the source's trustworthiness through lateral reading.

\n
    \n
  • Research the ☑ author's expertise and credentials in new browser tabs.\n
    • \n
  • Research the ☑ reputation of the publisher or outlet in new browser tabs.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Find more than what finds you

\n
\n
\n\n

D1G1O5Recognise that the information people encounter about an SSI may only show part of the picture.

\n
    \n
  • D1G1O1H1Explain the concepts of ☑ echo chamber and ☑ filter bubble.\n
    • \n
  • Identify ☑ barriers to access in different information environments → e.g. paywalls, language level, technical requirements, disability access.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H1 Analyse gaps in a person's use of information environments that may limit their basis for forming an informed opinion on an SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Explain how tailoring an information item to a specific audience may result in a selective or incomplete representation of the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • D1G1O1H2Suggest concrete steps for broadening the range of information environments used for a specific SSI topic.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D1G2O1Select suitable information environments for a specific SSI search.

\n
    \n
  • D1G2O1H1Identify the specific aspect of the SSI to investigate.\n
    • \n
  • D1G2O1H2Assess your existing knowledge about the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • D1G2O1H3Break down the SSI into key terms for your search.\n
    • \n
  • Match the information need to appropriate types of information environments.\n
    • \n
  • Justify the selection of specific information environments for the search purpose.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D1G2O1Formulate tailored search queries for the selected information environments.

\n
    \n
  • D1G2O1H1Adapt ☑ search queries to the specific features of the selected information environment.\n
    • \n
  • D1G2O1H1Refine ☑ search queries based on initial results.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Diversify the search across different information environments, queries, and source categories.

\n
    \n
  • Identify source categories or information environments not yet covered in the search.\n
    • \n
  • Reformulate queries to reach different types of sources.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D1G4 Pause before you click

\n
\n
\n\n

D1G2O1Evaluate the relevance of search results or feed posts before engaging with them.

\n
    \n
  • D1G2O1H1Assess the topical match between a search result or post and the information need.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the currency and source of a search result or post.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Identify features designed to attract attention and prompt engagement.

\n
    \n
  • Identify ☑ emotionally charged language in titles, headlines, or snippets.\n
    • \n
  • Identify features of emotionally charged, sensationalised, or oversimplified presentation — including clickbait, memes, short formats.\n
    • \n
  • Identify mismatches between images and headlines or snippets.\n
    • \n
  • Identify ☑ content formats that prioritise engagement over completeness.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Identify markers of commercial or promotional intent.

\n
    \n
  • Identify ad labels, sponsored content markers, and other meta-tags.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse visual and textual cues indicating sponsored content.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Recognise labels and surface features that signal the need for caution.

\n
    \n
  • Explain why labels such as "breaking news" or "AI-generated" signal the need for caution before engaging with the information item.\n
    • \n
  • Explain why a professional-looking surface does not indicate trustworthiness.\n
    • \n
  • Distinguish between reputable-looking domains or and actually trustworthy source\n
    • \n
  • Recognise the tailoring of surface features to the intended audience of an information item..\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Verify the authenticiy and original context of visual content.

\n
    \n
  • Explain the concepts of ☑ cheap fakes and ☑ deep fakes.\n
    • \n
  • Verify the authenticity of displayed images using ☑ verification tools.\n
    • \n
  • Verify the authenticity of displayed videos using ☑ verification tools.\n
    • \n
  • Verify the original context of an image or video using ☑ reverse image search.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Analyse the relationship between the packaging of information and its intended audience.

\n
    \n
  • Identify ☑ visual, ☑ linguistic, and ☑ auditory features that signal a specific target audience.\n
    • \n
  • Explain the function of surface elements in prompting the target audience to engage.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Understand why this matters

\n
\n
\n\n

Explain why anyone - irrespective of intelligence or education - is susceptible to encountering and sharing misinformation.

\n
    \n
  • Distinguish between misinformation and disinformation.\n
    • \n
  • Explain why the boundary between misinformation and disinformation is often difficult to determine in practice.\n
    • \n
  • Identify cognitive factors that make people susceptible to misinformation → e.g. ☑ confirmation bias, ☑ repetition effect, ☑ emotional reasoning.\n
    • \n
  • Identify situational factors that increase susceptibility → e.g. time pressure, information overload, trust in the sender.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Examine the consequences of selective or misleading information for individual decision-making, social cohesion, and democratic participation.

\n
    \n
  • Explain the importance of being aware of circulating misinformation for a full picture of an SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Describe effects of misleading information on individual decision-making → e.g. distorted health choices, consumer decisions, voting behaviour.\n
    • \n
  • Describe effects of misleading information on social cohesion → e.g. polarisation, manufactured consensus, normalisation of false claims, loss of common ground.\n
    • \n
  • Describe effects of misleading information on democratic participation → e.g. erosion of trust in institutions, voter manipulation, undermining of independent oversight.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D2Be wise & think twice

\n

Skim before you scan

\n
\n
\n\n

Assess the relevance of the information item for the SSI investigation.

\n
    \n
  • dentify mismatches between what the headline, snippet, or thumbnail promised and what the content delivers.\n
    • \n
  • Determine whether the content addresses the specific aspect of the SSI under investigation.\n
    • \n
  • Determine whether the content adds a new perspective beyond what you know or what has already been found.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Assess the range of perspectives presented in the information item.

\n
    \n
  • Classify the content as one-sided or multi-perspective.\n
    • \n
  • H5P Inés\n
    • \n
  • Identify which ☑ perspectives or positions are represented.\n
    • \n
  • Identify which ☑ perspectives or positions are absent.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Scan before you trust

\n
\n
\n\n

Cross-check the claim.

\n
    \n
  • Identify the claim.\n
    • \n
  • Check whether the claim has been reviewed on fact-checking websites.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Distinguish between unsupported and justified claims (C vs. CER).

\n
    \n
  • Identify the ☑ evidence or the lack thereof.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the ☑ reasoning or the lack thereof.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the claim as unsupported (C) or justified (CER).\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Evaluate the relevance of the evidence in relation to the claim.

\n
    \n
  • Specify the scope and assertion of the claim.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the topical fit: whether the evidence addresses the same subject matter as the claim.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the scope fit: whether the evidence addresses the same conditions, time frame, or population as the claim.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the logical fit: whether the evidence supports the specific assertion made in the claim.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the temporal fit: whether the evidence is current.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the evidence as relevant, partially relevant, or irrelevant.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Verify the reliability of the evidence based on scientific knowledge.

\n
    \n
  • Identify the source of the evidence within the information item.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the methodological quality of the evidence, e.g. sample size, representativeness, data type, limitations.\n
    • \n
  • Examine whether the data are reported without distortion, omission, or misinterpretation.\n
    • \n
  • Assess whether numerical evidence is contextualised with an appropriate baseline, denominator, or comparison.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the evidence as reliable, partially reliable, or unreliable.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Analyse the coherence of the reasoning connecting evidence and claim.

\n
    \n
  • D2G1O4H1 Specify the assumptions underlying the reasoning.\n
    • \n
  • D2G1O4H2 Assess whether the reasoning logically connects the evidence to the claim.\n
    • \n
  • D2G1O4H3 Examine whether the reasoning avoids ☑ logical fallacies.\n
    • \n
  • D2G1O4H4 Classify the reasoning as coherent, partially coherent, or incoherent.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D2G1O5Evaluate the overall strength of the argument.

\n
    \n
  • D2G1O4H1 Integrate the relevance, reliability, and coherence assessments.\n
    • \n
  • D2G1O4H2 Assess the argument's strength base on the quality of their supporting evidence and reasoning.\n
    • \n
  • D2G1O4H2 Classify the argument as fully justified, partially justified, poorly justified.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Follow the thread

\n
\n
\n\n

D2G3O2Identify the viewpoint of the information item.

\n
    \n
  • D2G3O2H1Identify the SSI-question the information item addresses.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the viewpoint, whether it is a binary position (yes/no) or a qualified stance (with conditions, scope, or limits).\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Map the arguments to the viewpoint.

\n
    \n
  • Identify supporting arguments, i.e. arguments that explain why the viewpoint holds.\n
    • \n
  • Identify limiting arguments, i.e. arguments that define when or where the viewpoint does not hold.\n
    • \n
  • Identify weighing arguments, i.e. arguments that justify why one side prevails.\n
    • \n
  • Identify counter-arguments, i.e. arguments against the viewpoint, which presented externally or acknowledged internally within the viewpoint.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the argumentation as linear, dual-perspective, or rebuttal-based.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Assess the coherence of the overall argumentation.

\n
    \n
  • Assess whether all arguments support the overall viewpoint.\n
    • \n
  • Identify contradictions or logical breaks within the argumentation.\n
    • \n
  • Classify the argumentation as coherent, partially coherent, or incoherent.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D2G2Read between the lines

\n
\n
\n\n

D2G2O1Identify framing and rhetorical devices.

\n
    \n
  • D2G2O1H1Identify framing choices, → e.g. which aspects are foregrounded, which are backgrounded, which metaphors structure the message.\n
    • \n
  • D2G2O1H2Identify rhetorical devices, → e.g. repetition, parallelism, rhetorical questions, loaded comparisons.\n
    • \n
  • D2G2O1H3Identify sensational and emotional language, → e.g. superlatives, fear/outrage words, dramatic imagery, urgency cues.\n
    • \n
  • Identify manipulative use of imagery, → e.g. selective framing of photos, emotionally charged images, mismatched illustrations, misleading graphs or charts.\n
    • \n
  • Identify manipulative use of sound, → e.g. dramatic music, emotionally charged voice tone, selective audio cues.\n
    • \n
  • D2G2O1H4Identify mismatches between textual, visual, and auditory elements within the information item.\n
    • \n
\n

D2G2O2Identify deceptive tactics.

\n
    \n
  • D2G2O2H1 Identify omissions, i.e. relevant information that is left out.\n
    • \n
  • Identify fabrications, i.e. invented facts, quotes, or data.\n
    • \n
  • Identify misrepresentations, i.e. real facts distorted or taken out of context.\n
    • \n
  • Identify one-sided presentations that are disguised as neutral reporting.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Zoom out: Locate the information item in its context and intended reception.

\n
\n
\n\n

D2G2O3Identify the purpose and motives behind the information item.

\n
    \n
  • Identify the geographical, cultural, and/or political context in which the information item was created.\n
    • \n
  • Determine the purpose of the information item based on its ☑ source category.\n
    • \n
  • Identify potential motives of the author or distributor, e.g. financial benefit, political gain, reputation, ideological commitment.\n
    • \n
  • Identify who might benefit from the information being believed or spread.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Analyse the tailoring of the information item to its likely target audiences.

\n
    \n
  • Identify likely target audiences of the information item.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse the adaptation of content complexity to the audiences.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse the adaptation of linguistic features to the audiences.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse the adaptation of visual features to the audiences.\n
    • \n
  • Analyse the adaptation of auditory features to the audiences.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D3Make up your mind

\n

Check the science: Evaluate empirical claims about the SSI against the current scientific knowledge base.

\n
\n
\n\n

D3G2O1Assess the degree of scientific consensus on empirical claims related to the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O1H2Distinguish between central superordinate claims and subordinate ones addressing specific aspects.\n
    • \n
  • Human activities contribute to global warming. vs. The magnitude of warming by 2100 will be X–Y degrees.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O1H2Compare findings from multiple scientific sources addressing the same claim.\n
    • \n
  • Search for meta-analyses or systematic reviews.\n
    • \n
  • Identify official position statements from globally recognised scientific bodies.\n
    • \n
  • Look for large-scale expert surveys.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H2Determine the degree of expert agreement on each claim.\n
    • \n
  • Assess the ratio of peer-reviewed literature.\n
    • \n
  • Use tools like Google Scholar / Web of Scientce to see if the dissenting view is represented in 1% or 40% of published papers.\n
    • \n
  • Maria E\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H2Classify claims as strongly established, moderately established, or contested.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G1O2Summarise the established scientific knowledge on the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G1O1H1Identify the mechanisms described in authoritative scientific sources that experts agree on.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H1Organise findings in a coherent overview.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G1O2Analyse the scope of scientific uncertainty on the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G1O1H1Classify types of uncertainty where data exist but experts disagree, e.g. incomplete data, model limitations, competing interpretations, limited expert discussions.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H1Identify unresolved questions where data is currently missing.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H2Explain the effect of uncertainty on the interpretation of evidence.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D3G2Map the full picture: Analyse the multidimensional nature of the SSI.

\n
\n
\n\n

D3G2O2Analyse the controversy and its stakeholders.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O2H2Characterise the nature of the controversy – scientific, ethical, political, economic, cultural, or mixed.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H3Identify decision-makers and regulatory actors.\n
    • \n
  • Identify stakeholder groups active in the SSI discourse, including nature and future generations as stakeholders represented by human advocates.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the interests, values, and ☑ perspectives – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific – that each stakeholder group brings into the discourse.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Analyse main drivers behind the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O2H2Identify the main drivers behind the SSI across the different ☑ perspectives.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H3Select the perspectives most relevant for the discussion of this SSI.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G2O1Analyse the impacts of the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O1H1 Identify impacts across the relevant perspectives.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O1H1 Distinguish short-term and long-term impacts.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O1H1Distinguish local and global impacts.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O1H2Distinguish positive and negative impacts.\n
    • \n
  • Map the effects of the impacts on each stakeholder group.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G2O2Analyse proposed responses to the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O2H2Identify proposed ☑ policy measures.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H3Identify technological alternatives.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H2Identify ☑ nature-based solutions.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H3Identify proposed behavioural or societal changes.\n
    • \n
  • D3G2O2H3Compare proposed responses in terms of feasibility.\n
    • \n
  • Compare proposed responses in terms of their impacts on the different stakeholder groups.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D3G3 Trace the voices: Evaluate existing viewpoints by analysing the trade-offs between perspectives in the SSI discourse.

\n
\n
\n\n

Collect viewpoints on the SSI across stakeholders.

\n
    \n
  • Identify viewpoints expressed by different stakeholder groups.\n
    • \n
  • Identify evidence-based arguments supporting each viewpoint.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G1O1Analyse viewpoints against the scientific knowledge base.

\n
    \n
  • D3G1O1H2Identify omissions in how the viewpoints represent established knowledge and uncertainty.\n
    • \n
  • Identify exaggerations in how the viewpoints represent established knowledge and uncertainty.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H3Assess whether the viewpoints proportionally represent the degree of scientific certainty and uncertainty.\n
    • \n
  • D3G1O1H4Classify the viewpoints as strongly aligned, partially aligned, or weakly aligned with the current scientific knowledge base.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G1O1Analyse the trade-offs between perspectives embodied by each viewpoint.

\n
    \n
  • D3G2O1H1Identify the perspectives a viewpoint prioritises – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the perspectives a viewpoint deprioritises or ignores – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n
    • \n
  • Compare how different viewpoints prioritise and deprioritise perspectives differently.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D3G4Take your stand: Form your position on the SSI with clarity about the basis of your reasoning.

\n
\n
\n\n

D3G4O1Clarify your own values and concerns regarding the SSI.

\n
    \n
  • D3G4O1H1Identify your personal relation to the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Identify personal needs and interests that affect your position.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the values you want to guide your reasoning on this SSI.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Form your position by weighing evidence, values, and trade-offs.

\n
    \n
  • Weigh the scientific evidence against your personal needs and interests.\n
    • \n
  • Weigh the trade-offs across the perspectives – nature-centred, individual, social, economic, political, or scientific.\n
    • \n
  • Formulate your position, whether a binary position (yes/no) or a qualified viewpoint (with conditions, scope, or limits).\n
    • \n
  • Identify the basis of your position: intuition, critically analysed information, or scientific knowledge.\n
    • \n
  • Acknowledge the resulting quality of your position: an unexamined opinion, a critically informed position, or a scientifically substantiated judgement.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Situate your position within the SSI discourse.

\n
    \n
  • Identify the alignment of your position with existing viewpoints.\n
    • \n
  • Identify the representation of your position in the public discourse.\n
    • \n
  • Review opposing arguments and their evidence.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D3G4O2Reassess your position when new information or arguments emerge.

\n
    \n
  • D3G4O2H1Monitor new scientific findings and developments on the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Revise your position when the basis for change is strong enough.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D4Speak out and take action

\n

D4G1Plan your civic engagement: Develop a strategy to address the SSI through civic action.

\n
\n
\n\n

D4G1O1Identify needs and opportunities for engagement.

\n
    \n
  • D4G1O1H1Identify the needs of yourself, your family, your friends, your school, the local community or broader society with regard to the pertinent socio-scientific issue.\n
    • \n
  • D4G1O1H1Identify the impact of your needs on other ☑ stakeholders.\n
    • \n
  • D4G1O1H2Identify gaps in existing efforts addressing these needs.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G1O2Determine the purpose of your engagement.

\n
    \n
  • D4G1O2H1Define the impact you want to achieve.\n
    • \n
  • Determine the recipient(s) or target group(s) of your civic engagement.\n
    • \n
  • H3: Weigh the potential effect of different forms of engagement — inform, argue, or act.\n
    • \n
  • D4G1O2H2Select the type of civic engagement you would like to take — inform, argue, or act.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G1O3Select the most appropriate information environment for your engagement.

\n
    \n
  • D4G1O3H1☑ Match the information environment to your recipient(s) or target group(s).\n
    • \n
  • Match the information environment to the type of engagement.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G1O4Anticipate feedback and reactions.

\n
    \n
  • D4G1O4H1Review similar initiatives to understand common feedback and reactions.\n
    • \n
  • D4G1O4H2Simulate the engagement with peers.\n
    • \n
  • D4G1O4H3Prepare responses to likely objections.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D4G2Inform: Communicate established viewpoints on an SSI objectively.

\n
\n
\n\n

D4G2O1Tailor your message to the target audience.

\n
    \n
  • D4G2O1H1Assess the audience's previous knowledge of the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt the ☑ content complexity to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • D4G2O1H2Adapt ☑ linguistic features to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt ☑ visual features to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt ☑ auditory features to the audience.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G2O2Present opposing viewpoints transparently.

\n
    \n
  • D4G2O2H1Organise the ☑ arguments and supporting ☑ evidence for each viewpoint.\n
    • \n
  • D4G2O2H2Report facts and provide context.\n
    • \n
  • D4G2O2H3Refer to ☑ sources.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D4G3Argue: Communicate your own viewpoint on the SSI persuasively.

\n
\n
\n\n

D4G3O1Define your [message.]()

\n
    \n
  • D4G3O1H1Formulate a clear statement on the SSI in a single sentence.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O1H2Identify a hook to grab the recipients' attention.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O1H3Provide background information on the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Select arguments that support your message.\n
    • \n
  • Select supporting evidence for each argument.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O1H4Build the argumentative chain from evidence via arguments to the message.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G2O1Tailor your message to the target audience.

\n
    \n
  • D4G2O1H1Assess the audience's previous knowledge of the SSI.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt the ☑ content complexity to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • D4G2O1H2Adapt ☑ linguistic features to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt ☑ visual features to the audience.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt ☑ auditory features to the audience.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

D4G3O3Address counter-arguments.

\n

H5P (Sini)

\n
    \n
  • D4G3O3H1Identify likely counter-arguments.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O3H2Research evidence and reasoning behind the counter-arguments.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O3H3Evaluate their relevance and validity.\n
    • \n
  • D4G3O3H4Develop responses and alternative arguments.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

D4G4Act as a responsible democratic citizen: Execute your engagement and evaluate its impact.

\n
\n
\n\n

O1: Prepare the execution.

\n
    \n
  • Outline concrete steps and a timeline.\n
    • \n
  • Identify resources and support needed.\n
    • \n
  • Define success criteria before acting.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Carry out the engagement.

\n
    \n
  • Execute the engagement according to the plan.\n
    • \n
  • Adapt the execution to unforeseen circumstances.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Evaluate the impact.

\n
    \n
  • Observe and document reactions and effects.\n
    • \n
  • Compare observed outcomes with the defined success criteria.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n

Reflect on your engagement.

\n
    \n
  • Identify what worked and what did not.\n
    • \n
  • Derive lessons for future engagement.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
","UPDATEDAT":"2026-04-28T20:43:54.718Z","ID":"42155dd7-0e9a-4b3d-852e-4b4d32ba6aef","TITLE":"2026-04-18 - Train the Trainer"}