The Philippines' National Book Development Board (Filipino: Pambansang Lupon sa Pagpapaunlad ng Aklat), abbreviated as NBDB, is an agency of the Philippine government under the Department of Education responsible for developing and supporting the Philippine book publishing industry.
ENGLISH 1 Quarter 1 Week 7: Being Open to Contrary Opinions
II. SUBJECT MATTER
A. 1. Remarks on Given Issues (using the whole-text repeated approach)
2. Panel Discussion (using the sectional approach)
B. 1. Sketches, signs, optical illusions
2. Gambits signaling opinions and positive or negative rejoinders
C. “Of Cocks and Hens” by Alejandro R. Roces
D. Guidelines for editing reactions to a given text
Listening: Note – These are to be spread out (one set or task per day for two or three days)
A. Establishing linkage
In Week 5 you found out the difference between opinion and straight news reporting. What is the difference between the two? Where in the newspaper do you find opinions? What forms do they take? Why is it good to listen to the opinion of other people, too?
Task 1 – Listening to contrary opinions on a given issue using the whole-text repeated approach.
1. First round to determine the issue
Listen to some remarks made in an ambush interview. You will hear four remarks per set. From the remarks made, guess the issue in question.
? Gambling should be prohibited. People lose their hard-earned money in a g ame of chance. That money could be used to buy food and other necessities.
? Who knows Lady Luck might smile on me and I could win a fabulous amount which I could never acquire even in a hundred lifetimes. Anyway, I am betting only a small amount — the little extra we can spare.
? It's my money and I can do with it as I please as long as I do not hurt others. It is my right. No one is going to dictate to me how to spend what I earned.
? Gambling weakens moral fibers. It can be addictive as they say "A quitter never wins and a winner never quits." Soon, you may not know when to put a stop to it, you get hooked so to say.
? Smoking is unhealthful not only to the smoker but even to those around him or her. It has been proven to cause lung disease even cancer that can be fatal.
? Smoking calms my nerves. When the pressure of work is too much, there's nothing like a good smoke to calm me down.
? What will happen to the tobacco industry if you prohibit smoking? So many are dependent on it for their livelihood – tobacco farmers, workers in tobacco factories, vendors, etc. all of them will be affected. Besides, think of the big donations given yearly to charitable institutions by the tobacco industry.
? Look at all that hard-earned money going up in smoke. Cigarettes are costly and before you know it you will be smoking a pack — even two packs a day because you will became progressively dependent on it.
2. Second round to determine one’s stand on the issue and the reasons cited to defend his stand.
Listen to the remarks once more and this time determine the stand of the speaker and the reasons he gives to support his stand. Enter your finding for each set in a chart such as this.
Remark Stand Reason Given
Task 2 – Listening to a panel of speakers using the sectional approach.
Listen to a sales talk from a panel of speakers. As you listen find out answer to these questions:
1. What is the speech event?
2. Where is it taking place?
3. Who are the speakers?
4. What is their objective?
5. Who are the listeners?
NOTE: Pause after each speaker to give time for the students to answer the questions.
Speaking: NOTE: Match the tasks in this section with the listening tasks that go with them.
Task 3 – Expressing opinions and reactions to remarks made on given issues A. State your own opinion on the issues (smoking and gambling) that were talked about in the listening activity. Use these expressions to signal your thoughts and feelings on the issue.
Task 4 – Expressing and responding to viewpoints
A. What do you see in these sketches? Share it with your group-mates who will react to what you say about each sketch. They may agree or disagree with your opinion using these terms. You are to take turns doing this. Choose the best interpretation in the group for presentation to the entire class.
B. Present the interpretation your group chose and explain it to the class. You may have to use the expressions “This is . . .” or “There are . . “ in your explanation of the sketch assigned to your group.
Reading and Study Skills (Integrated with speaking)
Task 1 – Making sense of visuals
What do you understand by these remarks?
1. "My eyes are playing tricks on me"
2. "It's an optical illusion."
3. "It could be either one. It all depends on how you look at it."
B. Study these sketches and answer the questions raised about each of them. Then pair off and find out if your partner’s answer is the same as yours. If it is, then, together try and look at the other possible interpretation of the optical illusion. If your answers are not the same show each other what may be seen in the picture.
1. Presentation to the class as an example
Is the book looking towards you . . or away from you?
2. Practice Materials
Task 2 – Interpreting signs
Some of the things we are expected to read and interpret are not text but visuals and signs. Here are some common signs. Where do you expect to find them? What do they mean? To whom are they addressed and do they lend themselves to more than one interpretation?
Here are some common signs. What do they mean? To whom are they addressed and where do you expect to see them?
Task 3 – Noting reasons
Read this text taken from the Bible showing how Solomon, the wisest king, arrived at a decision about a baby who was claimed by two mothers.
The Baby with Two Mothers
(from The Children’s Bible)
Anne de Graaf
One day, two mothers came to King Solomon. Each carried a baby. The first woman’s baby was dead. The second woman’s was alive. Each woman claimed the living baby as her own.
Solomon said, “Guard, cut the living child in two. Then give half to one woma n and half to the other.”
The first woman screamed, “No! Please, don’t! You’ll kill him. Oh my Lord give her the baby. Then at least he’ll stay alive.”
But the second woman said, “You’re right King Solomon. Go on, and cut him in half! Then neither of us will have him.”
The king sighed and told his guard, “Give the living baby to the first woman. She spoke as only a true mother could have.”
Such a problem situation which happened in King Solomon’s time would not have to be resolved in the same manner. Science has now made it possible to establish who the parents of a person are through DNA testing. Nonetheless the manner in which King Solomon solved the problem proved not only to be effective but it also revealed his “wisdom of the heart” which earned him the name “the wisest king” in the Old Testament.
Answer these questions:
A. Identify these parts of the story
1. Setting –
b. Place –
a. Time –
3. Situation –
4. Problem –
5. Solution –
6. Evaluation –
B. Answer these questions
1. From what source was the story taken?
2. What was the logic of the decision to have the baby cut in two?
3. What was the real motive behind that decision?
4. On what did the King base his final decision?
5. In what way did this case show his wisdom?
6. How could such a problem be solved today?
A. Read the selection “Of Cocks and Hens” by Alejandro Roces
B. Answer these questions:
1. What issue was highlighted in the selection which resulted in several different opinions?
2. What suggestions were given to resolve the issue?
3. What resulted from those suggestions?
4. How was the issue finally resolved?
C. How are the words in each number related in meaning
D. How would you distinguish a rooster from a hen?
E. Research on the following topics. Where do you expect to find information about them?
a. Where is this popular?
b. Where is it held?
c. How is it played?
d. How would you compare it to horseracing?
2. Alejandro Roces
a. What is he known for?
b. What recent award was given him?
c. What other high position did he told?
d. What particular work of his has gained him popularity?
Of Cocks and Hens
My brother Kiko once had a very peculiar chicken. It was peculiar because no one could tell whether it was a rooster or a hen. My brother claimed it was a rooster. I claimed it was a hen. We almost got lynched trying to settle the argument.
The w hole question began early one morning. Kiko and I were driving the chickens from the maizefields. The corn had just been planted and the chickens were scratching the seeds out for food. Suddenly we heard the staccato flapping of wings. We turned towards the direction of the sound and descried two chickens fighting in the far end of the field. We could not see the birds clearly as they were lunging at each other in a tourbillion of pinions and dust.
“Look at the rooster fight,” my brother exclaimed, pointing excitedly at one of the chickens. “Why, If I had a rooster like that I could get rich in the cockpits.”
“Let us go and catch it,” I suggested.
“No. You stay here. I will go and catch it,” Kiko said.
My brother stealthily approached the battling chickens. They were so busy fighting that they did not notice him as he approached. When he got near them, he dove and caught one of them by the leg. It struggled and squawked. Kiko finally held it by both wing and it stood still. I ran over to where he was and took a look at the chicken.
“Aba, it is a hen,” I said.
“What is the matter with you? My brother asked. “Is the heat making you sick?”
“No. Look at its head. It has no comb or wattles.”
“No comb or wattles! Who cares its comb and wattles? Didn't you see it fight?
“Sure I saw it fight. But I still say it is a hen.”
“A hen! Did you ever see a hen with spurs like these? Or a hen with a tail like this?”
“I do not care about its spurs or tail. I tell you that it is a hen. Why, just look at it!”
Kiko and I could not agree on the quiddity that determined the sex of a chicken. If the animal in question had been a carabao, then it would have been simple. All we would have had to do was to look at the carabao involved. There would have been no time wasted scrutnizing its tail, hooves or horns. We would simply concentrate our gaze on one part of its anatomy. We would look at the karbaw straight in the face. And if it had a brass ring on its nose, then the carabao would indubitably be a bull. But chickens are unlike carabaos. So the controversy went on in the fields the whole morning.
At noon, we left to have our lunch. We argued about it on the way home. When we arrived at our house, Kiko tethered the chicken to a peg. The chicken flapped its wings — and then crowed!
“There!” my brother exclaimed triumphantly. “Did you hear that? I suppose now you are going to tell me that hens crow and that carabaos fly.”
“I do not care if it crows or not,” I said. “That chicken is a hen.”
We entered the house and the discussion continued during lunch.
“It is not a hen,” Kiko said. “It is a rooster.”
“It is a hen,” I said.
“it is not.”
“That’s enough,” Mother interposed. “How many times must Father tell you boys not to argue during lunch? What is the argument about this time?”
We told Mother and she went out to look at the chicken.
“That chicken,” she said, “is binabae. It is a rooster that looks like a hen.”
That should have terminated the argument. But Father also went to see the chicken, and he, too, intercalated.
“No, Mother,” he said, “you are wrong. That chicken is a binalalake, a hen that looks like a cock.”
“Have you been tippling again?” Mother asked.
“No,” Father answered.
“Then what makes you say that rooster is a hen? Have you ever seen a hen with feathers like that?”
“No. But, look. I have handled fighting cocks since I was a boy. And you cannot tell me that thing there is a rooster.”
Before Kiko and I realized what had happened Father and Mother were arguing about the chicken all by themselves. Soon Mother was crying. She often cried when she argued with Father.
“You know very well that, that is cock,” she sobbed, “You are just being mean and stubborn.”
“I’m sorry,” Father said. “But I know a hen when I see one.”
Then he placed his arms around Mother and called her corny names like my Reina Elena, my Madonna and my Maria Clara. He usually did that when Mother
cried. Kiko and I felt very embarrassed. We left the house without finishing our repast.
“I know who can settle this question,” my brother said.
“Who?” I asked.
Tenienteng Tasio was the head of the village. I did not think that the teniente was the man who could solve our problem. For Tenienteng Tasio was a philosopher. By this I mean that he was a man who explained his strange views with even stranger reasons. For example: the teniente frowned on cockfighting. Now many people proscribe rooster fighting. They will tell you that cocking is cruel and/or that gambling is bad. Neither of these was the teniente's reason. Cocking, in his estimate, was a waste of time. Why? Because it had already been proven that one battle cock can beat another.
Tenienteng Tasio, however, had one factor in his favor. He was the oldest man in the barrio. And while this did not make him an ornithologist, still, we have to admit, that anything that is said always sounds more authoritative if it is said by a person with hoary hairs. So, when Kiko suggested that we consult the teniente, I did not refuse. I acquiesced to let him be the arbiter of our dispute. Kiko then untied the chicken and we both took it to the village head.
“Tenienteng Tasio, is this chicken a male or a female?” Kiko asked.
“That is a question that should concern only another chicken,” the teniente replied.
Both Kiko and I were taken aback by this replication. But Kiko was obstinate. So he tried another approach.
“Look, teniente,” he said, “my brother and I happen to have a special interest in this particular chicken. Please give us an answer. Just say: Yes or No. Is this a rooster?
“It does not look like any rooster that I have seen,” said the teniente.
“In that case, it is a hen,” I said.
“It does not look like any hen I have ever seen,” was the reply.
My brother and I were dumbfounded. For a long while we remained speechless.
Then Tenienteng Tasio asked; “Have you two ever seen an animal like that before?”
“Kiko and I had to admit that we hadn’t.
“Then how do you both know it is a chicken?”
“Well, what else could it be?” Kiko asked in turn.
“It could be another kind of a bird.”
“Oh. God, no,” Kiko said, and we walked away.
“Well, what do we do now?” I asked.
“I know what,” my brother said. “Let us go to town and ask Mr. Cruz. He would know.” Mr. Eduardo Cruz lived in the nearby town of Alcala. He had studied poultry husbandry at Los Banos and operated a large egg farm. When we got there, Mr. Cruz was taking his siesta, so Kiko released the chicken in the yard.
The older chickens would not associate with ours. Not only did they keep as far away from it as they could, but they did not even seem to care to which sex it belonged. Unembarrassed by this, our chicken chased and disgraced several pullets.
“There!” my brother exclaimed. “That should prove to you that it is a rooster.”
“It proves nothing of the sort,” I said. “It only proves it has rooster instincts — but it can still be a hen.”
As soon as the poulterer was up, we caught the chicken and took it to his office.
“Mr. Cruz,” Kiko said, “is this a hen or a rooster?”
The poulterer looked at the bird curiously, and then said; “Hmm. I don’t know. I couldn’t tell in one look. I have never come across a biddy like that before.”
“Well, is there any way you can tell?”
“Why, sure. Look at the feathers on its back. If the ends are round, it is a she; if they are pointed, then it is a he.”
The three of us examined its feathers closely. It had both!
“Hmmm. Very peculiar,” said Mr. Cruz.
“Is there any other way you could tell?”
“I could kill it and examine its insides.”
“No, I don’t want it killed,” my brother said.
I took the chicken in my arms and we headed back to the barrio. Kiko was silent most of the way. Then suddenly, he snapped his fingers and said;
“I know how I can convince you that this is a rooster.”
“How?” I asked.
“Would you agree that this is a rooster if I make it fight in a cockpit — and it wins?”
“If this hen of yours can beat a gamecock, I would believe anything,” I said.
“All right,” he said, “we will take it to the cockpit this coming Sunday.”
So that Sunday we took the chicken to the cockpit. Kiko looked around for an appropriate opponent and finally decided on a red rooster. I recognized the rooter as a veteran of the pit whose picture had once graced the cover of the gamercock magazine, Pintakasi. Too, it was the chanticleer that had once escaped to the forest and lured all the hens away from the surrounding farms. Raising its serpentine head, the red stag eyed our chicken arrogantly and then jiggled its sickle feathers. Thisscared me. For I knew that when a fighting rooster is in rut, it is twice as ferocious.
“Do not pit your hen against that rooster,” I told Kiko. “That is not a native chicken. That’s a Texas.”
“That doesn’t mean anything to me,” my brother said. “My rooster will kill.”
“Don’t be a fool,” I said. “That red cock is a killer. It has killed more chickens than the cholera. There is no rooster in this province that can take its gaff. Pick on a less formidable rooster.”
My brother would not listen. The match was made and the birds were arrayed for battle. Saber-typed spurs were fastened to their left legs. I said a tacit prayer to Santa Rita de Casia, patroness of the impossible. Then the fight began. Both birds were released at the center of the arena. The Texan stag scratched the ground as if it were digging a grave for its opponent. Moments later, the two fledgy fighter confronted each other. I expected our rooster to die of fright. Instead a strange thing happened. A lovesick expression came into the red rooster’s eyes. Then it did a love dance. Naturally, this was a most surprising incident to one and all, but particularly to
those who had stakes on the Texas rooster. For it was evident that the Texan was thoroughly infatuated with our chicken and that any intention it had for the moment was strictly amatory. But before anyone could collect his wits, our fowl rushed at the red stag with its hackle feathers flaring. In one lunge, it fleshed its spurs in its adversary’s breast. The fight was over! The sentencer raised our chicken in token of victory.
“Tiope! Tiope! Fixed fight!” the crowd shouted.
Then a riot broke out. People tore the benches apart and used them as clubs. My brother and I had to egress through a postern. I had the victorious bird under my arms. We ran towards the coco-grove and we kept on running till we eluded the angry mob. As soon as we felt safe, we sat on the ground and rested.
“Now are you convinced it is a rooster? Kiko muttered between breaths.
“Yes,” I answered.
I was so glad the whole thing was over!
But the chicken had other ideas. It began to quiver. Then something round and warm dropped on my hand. The chicken cackled with laughter. I looked down and saw an egg!
Literature – (One day may be devoted to this)
A. Establishing linkage with previous lessons
Earlier this week, you listened to remarks made on issues. One of these was gambling. What reasons were cited by those who were anti-gambling? by those pro-gambling?
B. Activating schema
1. What forms of gambling do we have in our country?
2. Which of these forms of gambling —
a. were popular even during the Spanish time?
b. are popular nationwide but especially in the provinces?
c. make use of machines? of live animals? of cards?
d. are held in special places designed purposely for them?
C. Clearance of difficulties
1. Checking of vocabulary homework through differentiated tasks
Task 1 – Put up a sketch of a rooster and a hen and have the students label the indicated
parts comb sickle feathers wings
wattles hackle feathers spurs
Task 2 – Milling around – Place these on strips and have the students mill around to look for the word that goes with the word on their strip. They end up as pairs or triplets and they tell the group why they think they go together.
Task 3 – Here is a list of words naming chickens. Put them in a diagram to show which words name a particular chicken.
rooster biddy fowl
gamecock chanticleer red stag
2. Taking up background information (This may be done in any number of ways – reporting, CLOZE exercises, video clips if available, etc.)
Cockfighting, also known as sabung or Pintakasi is to the Filipino as horse racing or dog racing is to other countries. It is held in a special called the cockpit or the coliseum. ______ cockfighting specially trained gamecocks are made _______ fight each other. They are equipped _____ razor sharp spurs tied to their ______ and they lunge at each other _____ one is killed or runs away. _____ they fight, bets are made by _________ onlookers. Hence, it is gambling of ____ sort. Cock fighting is quite popular _____ the provinces.
Alejandro R. Roces is a writer of note in our country. In fact, in 2003 he was _____ National Artist in literature with special _____ of his collection of essays entitled “_____ Brothers Peculiar Chicken.” In that work, ____ central topic was cockfighting and the ____ figure was the gamecock. The essays ____ satires calling attention to and poking _______ at man’s weaknesses.
Roces has also _____ positions of note such as President ______ the University of the Philippines and Secretary of _____. He continues to write columns in _______ Philippine newspapers.
D. Taking up the essay
1. What was the argument at the start of the essay?
2. Give the different ways the boys tried to settle the argument and what resulted from their attempts to do so. Enter your answers in this grid.
3. Who finally proved them wrong?
4. What then is the essayist’s objective?
5. What contributed to the humor of the selection?
6. What foible or practice of man is made fun of by the essayist?
7. What is the essayist saying about the human condition here?
8. Why did he use a satire to do this?
Attempts to Resolve the Issue Proof cited
One claim Counter claim Result
1. Own observation
2. Parent's Viewpoint
3. The town philosopher's view (oldest village head)
4. A scientist's view
5. The cockfight itself
A. In your journal write what you think and feel about the essay “Of Cocks and Hens.”
B. You might want to read the other essays of Roces in that volume. You might want to find out what he calls attention to in those essays e.g. “Of Cocks and Hens” and “Of Cocks and Kings.”
A. Editing one’s written work
Go over your entry responding to Roces’ “Of Cocks and Hens.” Review it using these questions as guidelines.
1. Did you make a brief summary of the entire selection to provide the context of your reaction?
2. Did you single out the particular points you would like to react to?
3. Did you state your reactions to those points and give reasons why you felt that way?
4. Did you use the expressions you learned to signal viewpoints(e.g. I personally think . . . To my mind . . ., As I see it . . ., etc.)?
5. Did you use the present tense when referring to your opinions and the past tense when referring to what took place in the selection?
6. Did you mention other examples of your own to support your views?
7. Did you close your entry with a statement indicating your overall response to the entire selection?
B. Rewriting of first draft
C. Peer editing using the same guidelines
Rewrite your second draft based on feedback your partner gave you which you consider valid.
This work is licensed under a Attribution Share Alike Creative Commons license