Glanz: aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt

2026-10-02T14:14:24Z

aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt

Neue Seite

{{T}}
{{BR}}
= ABI LF - Spontan auf Gegenargumente reagieren =

{{BR}}
= Einleitung =

'''Mini-description:''' React flexibly to unexpected questions and counterarguments. Instead of reciting prepared mini-speeches, use '''paraphrasing''', '''concession''', '''clarification''' and a reasoned response.

This aiMOOC is designed for '''Englisch als fortgeführte Fremdsprache, Kursstufe Baden-Württemberg, Leistungsfach'''. English comes first. German help is used only when context, word formation, visualisation, an English explanation and dictionary work have not solved the problem.

[[Datei:Classroom discussion (51266402888).jpg|500px|rahmenlos|center]]

{{#ev:youtube| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40LgX2hk3vo |500|center}}

'''Quick start:''' After the video, answer one question without notes: ''Which phrase would help you disagree firmly without sounding dismissive?'' Then give a different phrase with the same function.

'''Core routine:'''

{| class="wikitable"
! Listen
! Paraphrase
! Concede
! Clarify
! Respond
|-
| Identify the actual claim.
| ''So your point is that ...''
| ''I take your point that ...''
| ''When you say ..., do you mean ...?''
| Give a reason, example, source or qualification.
|}

Do not try to predict every question. Train the '''move''', not a memorised paragraph.

{{BR}}
== I-can goals ==

# '''I can''' identify the main point behind an unexpected question or counterargument.
# '''I can''' paraphrase another speaker's claim fairly before reacting.
# '''I can''' concede a valid point without giving up my own line of argument.
# '''I can''' ask precise clarification questions and repair misunderstandings.
# '''I can''' connect spontaneous speaking to evidence, material and topic knowledge at Leistungsfach level.
# '''I can''' distinguish the demands of the written Abitur examination from the Kommunikationsprüfung.

{{BR}}
== Prüfungsstand Baden-Württemberg: Abitur 2027 ==

'''Stand geprüft: 02.10.2026.''' For the 2027 Abitur, the current official regulations for modern foreign languages specify:

{| class="wikitable"
! Format
! Preparation
! Monologue
! Dialogue
! Minimum total examination time
|-
| Einzelprüfung
| 15 minutes
| about 5 minutes
| about 10 minutes
| at least 15 minutes
|-
| Tandemprüfung
| 15 minutes
| about 5 minutes per student
| about 10 minutes together
| at least 20 minutes
|}

The 2027 assessment criteria group performance into '''task fulfilment/content''', '''strategy and interactive/discourse competence''' and '''language performance'''. In the overall written Abitur examination, listening contributes 20 %, writing 55 % and the Kommunikationsprüfung 25 %.

Official sources:
# [https://km.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-km/intern/PDF/Dateien/Gymnasium/Dokumente_Abitur/Abitur_2027/Beurteilungs-_und_Korrekturrichtlinienerlass_Abitur_2027_Stand_07.07.2025.pdf Beurteilungs- und Korrekturrichtlinien Abitur 2027]
# [https://km.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-km/intern/PDF/Dateien/Gymnasium/Dokumente_Abitur/Abitur_2027/Facherlass_2027_Stand_09.09.2025.pdf Facherlass Abitur 2027]
# [https://www.bildungsplaene-bw.de/,Lde/LS/BP2016BW/ALLG/GYM/E1/IK/11-12-LF Bildungsplan Englisch Leistungsfach 11/12]

For later examination years, check the current official documents again before using timing, weighting or compulsory-topic information.

{{BR}}
== Leistungsfach focus ==

Leistungsfach means more than speaking for longer. You are expected to handle '''greater breadth, depth, complexity and differentiation''', link material independently and move confidently from analysis to evaluation and transfer. This course therefore emphasises AFB II/III moves: analysing how an argument works, comparing perspectives, evaluating evidence and responding to new implications.

[[Datei:WLM PU Presentation Speaking to Audience.JPG|500px|rahmenlos|center]]

{{BR}}
= Vorwissen aktivieren =

Without preparation, respond for 30 seconds to this statement:

'''“A good speaker should always answer immediately.”'''

Then test your response:
# Did you answer the exact claim?
# Did you acknowledge any valid aspect?
# Did you qualify or challenge the claim?
# Did you add a reason or example?
# Could a partner continue the discussion from your answer?

Repeat once. In round two, allow yourself one clarification question before answering.

{{BR}}
= Listening and Viewing =

{{BR}}
== Focus: clarification ==

{{#ev:youtube| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28KTEQ7veIc |500|center}}

'''Before viewing:''' Predict three situations in which a speaker may need clarification.

'''While viewing:''' Listen for phrases that request more detail. Do not copy full sentences mechanically; identify the communicative function.

'''After viewing:''' Turn each vague question into a precise clarification question:
# ''What do you mean?''
# ''Why?''
# ''Can you explain?''

Aim for questions that reveal the exact point of disagreement.

{{BR}}
== Focus: productive disagreement ==

{{#ev:youtube| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWHGKGS7zSc |500|center}}

After listening, distinguish between '''disagreeing with a claim''' and '''attacking a person'''. Create two short examples of respectful disagreement that keep the dialogue open.

{{BR}}
== Focus: listening before answering ==

[[Datei:Active listening.png|500px|rahmenlos|center]]

{{#ev:youtube| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1vskiVDwl4 |500|center}}

Choose two ideas from the video that improve spontaneous interaction. Apply them in a two-minute partner discussion. Your goal is not to “win” but to show that you heard, processed and responded to the other speaker.

{{BR}}
= Reading =

Read this short course text:

'''Strong spontaneous speaking is not the same as fast speaking. A strong speaker listens for the other person's actual claim, reformulates it fairly, acknowledges a valid point when appropriate and then answers the remaining issue with reasoning or evidence. Prepared phrase starters can support this process, but a memorised mini-speech often fails when the question changes. Flexibility therefore depends on understanding the line of argument rather than predicting every possible question.'''

'''AFB II:''' Analyse how the paragraph distinguishes speed from flexibility. Identify the logical sequence of the response strategy.

'''AFB III:''' Challenge one claim in the paragraph. Your counterargument must be specific enough that a partner could answer it without guessing what you mean.

{{BR}}
= Context vocabulary =

[[Datei:Speech bubbles.svg|500px|rahmenlos|center]]

{| class="wikitable"
! Function
! Useful language
! What it does
|-
| Paraphrasing
| ''So your argument is that ...''
| Checks whether you understood the point fairly.
|-
| Concession
| ''I take your point that ..., although ...''
| Acknowledges a valid element without abandoning your position.
|-
| Clarification
| ''When you say ..., do you mean ...?''
| Makes an unclear claim precise.
|-
| Qualification
| ''That may be true in some cases, but ...''
| Limits an overgeneralisation.
|-
| Rebuttal
| ''I am not convinced that this follows because ...''
| Answers the reasoning rather than the person.
|-
| Evidence
| ''A stronger piece of evidence would be ...''
| Connects the response to support.
|-
| Repair
| ''Let me rephrase that more precisely.''
| Corrects your own wording while keeping the turn.
|-
| Synthesis
| ''We seem to agree on ..., but differ on ...''
| Shows common ground and the remaining disagreement.
|}

{{BR}}
== Word formation ==

{| class="wikitable"
! Base
! Related forms
! Use
|-
| argue
| argument, argumentative, counterargument
| claims and opposing claims
|-
| clarify
| clarification, clarified
| making meaning more precise
|-
| concede
| concession
| acknowledging a valid point
|-
| persuade
| persuasion, persuasive
| influencing through reasons
|-
| respond
| response, responsive
| reacting to another contribution
|-
| agree
| agreement, disagreement
| locating common ground or conflict
|}

{{BR}}
== Help ladder ==

Use help in this order:

# '''Context:''' infer meaning from the surrounding sentence and the discussion.
# '''Word formation:''' identify prefixes, roots and suffixes.
# '''Visualisation:''' use the speech-bubble or active-listening graphic.
# '''English explanation:''' define the word in simple English and make your own example.
# '''Dictionary:''' consult a monolingual English dictionary first.
# '''German support:''' use a bilingual dictionary or short German explanation only if needed.

{{BR}}
= Analyse: what makes a response strong? =

A high-level response usually does more than contradict. It '''connects''' to the previous turn.

{| class="wikitable"
! Weak move
! Stronger move
|-
| ''No, that's wrong.''
| ''I see why that conclusion seems plausible, but it assumes that ...''
|-
| Ignores the partner's example.
| Refers to the example and tests whether it actually proves the claim.
|-
| Gives a memorised paragraph.
| Selects only the knowledge relevant to the new question.
|-
| Uses a vague ''maybe''.
| Qualifies precisely: ''This may apply to ..., but not necessarily to ...''
|-
| Changes topic.
| Clarifies the point, answers it, then extends the discussion.
|}

'''AFB II task:''' Explain why the stronger versions improve coherence and interaction.

'''AFB III task:''' Create a counterexample in which a direct ''No'' would actually be more effective than a long concession. Justify your choice of register and situation.

{{BR}}
= Speaking =

{{BR}}
== Drill 1: paraphrase before position ==

Partner A makes a claim. Partner B may not state an opinion until B has paraphrased the claim and A confirms that the paraphrase is fair. Then switch roles.

Use unfamiliar but school-appropriate topics. Do not rehearse full answers.

{{BR}}
== Drill 2: concession plus boundary ==

Complete the pattern with content rather than empty politeness:

'''I take your point that X. However, this does not necessarily mean Y, because Z.'''

Now remove the pattern and express the same logic in your own words.

{{BR}}
== Drill 3: unexpected-question cards ==

Create cards with prompts such as:
# ''What evidence would change your mind?''
# ''Isn't your example an exception rather than a rule?''
# ''How would your argument change in a different cultural context?''
# ''Which assumption in your argument is weakest?''

Draw one card at random. You have five seconds to begin, but you may use a clarification question instead of rushing into an answer.

{{BR}}
== Drill 4: Tandem simulation ==

Use a visual, quotation, short audio impulse or short non-fiction text. Prepare individually for 15 minutes. Then each person gives an approximately five-minute monologue followed by an approximately ten-minute joint dialogue.

The dialogue should contain at least one:
# accurate paraphrase,
# meaningful concession,
# clarification question,
# evidence-based rebuttal,
# synthesis of agreement and disagreement.

[[Datei:Wikimania 2026 Day 3 Active Listening workshop 01.jpg|500px|rahmenlos|center]]

{{BR}}
= Writing =

Write a '''120–160 word response-to-a-counterargument''', not a full essay.

Prompt:

'''Claim: “Prepared language is useless in spontaneous speaking because spontaneity cannot be trained.”'''

Your response should:
# paraphrase the claim fairly,
# concede one reasonable point,
# rebut or qualify the claim,
# support your response with a reason or example,
# end by reopening the discussion with a precise question.

Then reduce your written answer to five keywords and speak from those keywords only. The goal is to convert written reasoning into flexible oral language, not to memorise the paragraph.

{{BR}}
= Optional mediation =

'''Fictional school context:''' Eine Schulkonferenz diskutiert, ob jede größere Präsentation in der Kursstufe künftig mit einer zweiminütigen spontanen Fragerunde enden soll. Befürworter sehen darin Training für echte Gesprächssituationen; Kritiker warnen vor zusätzlichem Zeitdruck.

Mediate the core issue in English for an exchange student in 60–80 words. Do not translate sentence by sentence. Then respond orally when the student says:

'''“That sounds unfair to students who need more processing time.”'''

Use clarification and concession before giving your own position.

{{BR}}
= Feedback =

Peer feedback should follow the official 2027 assessment dimensions without pretending to issue an official grade.

{| class="wikitable"
! Dimension
! Evidence to notice
! Next-step question
|-
| Task fulfilment and content
| Did the speaker answer the actual question and develop relevant reasoning?
| ''What relevant point could be developed more precisely?''
|-
| Interaction and discourse
| Did the speaker react to the partner, clarify, connect and move the dialogue forward?
| ''Where could you refer more directly to the previous turn?''
|-
| Language
| Was vocabulary sufficiently precise, grammar functional, speech fluent and pronunciation understandable?
| ''Which phrase could be more precise or idiomatic?''
|}

Use the feedback pattern:

'''One strong move was ... / One missed opportunity was ... / In the next round, try ...'''

{{BR}}
= Fehleranalyse =

{| class="wikitable"
! Error pattern
! Diagnosis
! Repair
|-
| Answering a different question
| The speaker followed a prepared script.
| Paraphrase the question first.
|-
| Straw-man response
| The partner's point was oversimplified.
| Ask for confirmation after paraphrasing.
|-
| Empty concession
| ''I agree, but ...'' has no meaningful acknowledgement.
| Name the exact point you accept.
|-
| Vague rebuttal
| The speaker rejects without reasoning.
| Add cause, evidence, example or limitation.
|-
| Overlong preface
| Interaction becomes a mini-lecture.
| State the connection to the partner within the first two sentences.
|-
| Panic after misunderstanding
| The speaker guesses instead of repairing.
| Ask a targeted clarification question.
|}

{{BR}}
= Differenzierung =

{| class="wikitable"
! Level
! Language and support
! Material and analysis
! Tempo and output
|-
| Support
| phrase starters, visual routine, monolingual dictionary, one repeat request
| one source, clear claim, guided analysis question
| 20–30 second responses before longer turns
|-
| Standard
| reduced phrase sheet, no full notes
| two perspectives, evidence check, AFB II/III follow-up
| 45–60 second responses and short dialogue
|-
| Challenge
| no phrase sheet after preparation, precise hedging and reformulation
| complex or ambiguous material, independent source linking, competing interpretations
| sustained dialogue under exam-like timing
|}

At Leistungsfach level, aim progressively for less scaffolding, more complex material and more independent linking of evidence, context and perspective.

{{BR}}
= Responsible use of sources, AI and recordings =

Analyse and write independently. If you use AI for brainstorming or language feedback, identify that use where required and verify factual claims against reliable original sources. Do not submit an AI-generated replacement essay as your own work.

Use fictional personal data in practice tasks. Audio or video recording is optional and should remain private unless everyone involved has explicitly agreed to another use. Do not upload recordings, names or personal data without permission. This course does not require access to an external AI service.

Use only short, lawful excerpts or linked/embedded media. Do not reproduce complete compulsory texts or unauthorised film sequences.

{{BR}}
= Transfer =

Apply the same response routine to different Abitur-relevant contexts:

# a visual or statistical impulse,
# a short non-fiction claim,
# a literary interpretation,
# a cultural comparison,
# a mediated German-language stimulus,
# a partner's unexpected follow-up question.

The content changes; the interaction moves remain transferable.

{{BR}}
= Abi-Check =

Before an exam-style practice round, check:

{| class="wikitable"
! Question
! Yes / not yet
|-
| Can I paraphrase a difficult counterargument without distorting it?
|
|-
| Can I make a real concession and still maintain my position?
|
|-
| Can I ask for clarification instead of guessing?
|
|-
| Can I select relevant evidence rather than recite everything I know?
|
|-
| Can I react to the partner and actively advance the dialogue?
|
|-
| Can I repair my own wording without switching to German?
|
|-
| Can I link two materials or perspectives independently?
|
|}

{{BR}}
== Written examination versus Kommunikationsprüfung ==

{| class="wikitable"
! Written part
! Kommunikationsprüfung
|-
| Listening and writing, including reading, analysis and extended written response
| Monologic and dialogic speaking
|-
| Careful written structure and developed text production
| Real-time interaction, discourse management and spontaneous reaction
|-
| Source-based written analysis and argument
| Direct response to questions, impulses and a dialogue partner
|-
| Preparation focuses on planning written output
| Preparation must support flexible speaking, not memorised scripts
|}

Training one format does not replace training the other.

{{BR}}
= Folgekurs =

Continue with [[ABI LF - Kommunikationsprüfung unter Zeitdruck simulieren]] and [[ABI LF - Materialien im Gespräch selbstständig verknüpfen]]. In the follow-up, reduce phrase support and increase source complexity, surprise questions and AFB III evaluation.

{{BR}}
= Interaktive Aufgaben =

{{BR}}
== Quiz: Teste Dein Wissen ==

{{MC}}

'''What should you do first when a counterargument is unclear?'''
(Ask a precise clarification question)
(!Guess what the speaker probably means)
(!Repeat your prepared paragraph)
(!Change the topic)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What is the main purpose of paraphrasing in a discussion?'''
(To check and show that you understood the other person's point)
(!To make your own answer longer)
(!To avoid taking a position)
(!To replace evidence)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What does a meaningful concession do?'''
(It acknowledges a valid part of the other position)
(!It means giving up your whole argument)
(!It changes the topic completely)
(!It proves that both sides are identical)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which response best keeps a dialogue open?'''
(I take your point about cost, but how would that apply in the long term?)
(!No, that is simply wrong)
(!I already explained my opinion)
(!Let me repeat my full introduction)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What is a rebuttal?'''
(A reasoned response to a counterargument)
(!A translation into German)
(!A memorised opening sentence)
(!A list of unrelated examples)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What should you do if you notice that your wording was inaccurate?'''
(Repair it by rephrasing more precisely)
(!Stop speaking immediately)
(!Switch to German)
(!Pretend the mistake did not happen)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which skill is especially important in the dialogic part of the Kommunikationsprüfung?'''
(Reacting to and advancing the partner's contribution)
(!Reciting a five-minute text word for word)
(!Avoiding all follow-up questions)
(!Ignoring the partner's examples)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''How long is the preparation time for the 2027 Einzel- and Tandemprüfung in Baden-Württemberg?'''
(15 minutes)
(!5 minutes)
(!20 minutes)
(!30 minutes)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What is the approximate dialogic speaking time in the 2027 Tandemprüfung?'''
(About 10 minutes)
(!About 2 minutes)
(!About 5 minutes per person separately)
(!About 20 minutes per person)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which sequence best supports a flexible response?'''
(Listen, paraphrase, concede or clarify, then respond)
(!Memorise, repeat, ignore, finish)
(!Translate, pause, change topic, conclude)
(!Speak first, listen later, repeat, stop)

{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== Memory ==

<div class="memo-quiz">
{|
|-
| Paraphrase || Restate another speaker's point fairly
|-
| Concession || Acknowledge a valid part of another position
|-
| Clarification || Ask what an unclear term or claim means
|-
| Rebuttal || Answer a counterargument with reasons
|-
| Hedging || Limit certainty in a precise way
|-
| Turn-taking || Manage contributions in a dialogue
|-
| Evidence || Support a claim with material or reasoning
|-
| Repair || Correct or rephrase your own wording
|}
{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== Drag and Drop ==

<div class="lueckentext-quiz">

{| class="wikitable"
! Ordne die richtigen Begriffe zu.
! Thema
|-
| '''Clarification'''
| Could you clarify what you mean by that?
|-
| '''Concession'''
| I take your point that this could save time.
|-
| '''Paraphrase'''
| So your argument is that the rule affects everyone differently.
|-
| '''Rebuttal'''
| However, that does not fully address the long-term effect.
|-
| '''Synthesis'''
| We agree on the goal but differ on the best method.

|}
{{E}}

<br>
...
<br />

{{BR}}
== Kreuzworträtsel ==

<div class="kreuzwort-quiz">
{|
|-
| Paraphrase || What do you call restating another speaker's point in your own words?
|-
| Concession || What is the term for acknowledging a valid part of an opposing view?
|-
| Clarification || What do you request when a claim is unclear?
|-
| Rebuttal || What is a reasoned answer to a counterargument called?
|-
| Interaction || What term describes active exchange between speakers?
|-
| Evidence || What supports a claim with facts, examples or material?
|}
{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== LearningApps ==

<iframe> https://learningapps.org/index.php?s=ABI+LF+-+Spontan+auf+Gegenargumente+reagieren </iframe>

{{BR}}
== Lückentext ==

<quiz display=simple>
{'''Vervollständige den Text.'''<br>
|type="{}"}
Before responding, identify the other speaker's main { claim }.
A fair { paraphrase } shows that you have understood the point before challenging it.
A { concession } acknowledges a valid aspect without abandoning your own position.
If a term or assumption is unclear, ask for { clarification }.
A strong rebuttal needs a relevant { reason } rather than a simple contradiction.
In the dialogue, you should react to your { partner } instead of reciting a prepared text.
If your wording is inaccurate, use conversational { repair } and rephrase it.
At Leistungsfach level, independent material { linking } strengthens analysis and evaluation.
For the 2027 examination, the preparation time is { fifteen } minutes.
In a Tandemprüfung, the shared dialogic phase lasts about { ten } minutes.
</quiz>

<br>

{{BR}}
= Offene Aufgaben =

{{BR}}
=== Leicht ===

# [[Phrase cards]]: Create eight small cards with one flexible phrase starter each. Add the function on the back, not a German translation.
# [[Clarification clinic]]: Collect five vague questions and rewrite them as precise clarification questions.
# [[Paraphrase swap]]: Exchange three claims with a partner and produce two different fair paraphrases for each claim.
# [[Private speaking log]]: Record a voluntary 45-second response privately, listen once and note one successful interaction move and one repair target.

{{BR}}
=== Standard ===

# [[Counterargument carousel]]: In a group, rotate through four unfamiliar claims. Each response must include either a concession or a clarification question.
# [[Viewing analysis]]: Rewatch one embedded video and analyse how tone, turn-taking and phrasing influence the quality of disagreement.
# [[Evidence upgrade]]: Take five weak rebuttals and strengthen each with a reason, example, qualification or source reference.
# [[Mediation dialogue]]: Mediate the fictional German school-policy note into English and continue with a spontaneous two-minute discussion.

{{BR}}
=== Schwer ===

# [[Material synthesis]]: Connect a short text, a visual and a partner's counterargument in one coherent response without using a script.
# [[AFB III challenge]]: Formulate an evaluative question that forces a partner to reconsider an assumption, then respond when the same technique is used on you.
# [[Exam tandem]]: Complete a full exam-style tandem simulation with 15 minutes of individual preparation, monologues and a ten-minute joint dialogue.
# [[Source audit]]: Use a claim from your current course topic, verify it in two reliable sources and prepare a spoken response that distinguishes fact, interpretation and uncertainty.

{{:Offene Aufgabe - MOOC erstellen}}

{{BR}}
= Lernkontrolle =

# [[Fairness test]]: Given a partner's complex argument, paraphrase it so accurately that the partner accepts your version before you rebut it.
# [[Concession decision]]: Compare three possible concessions and explain which one genuinely advances the argument and which ones are merely polite fillers.
# [[Transfer under surprise]]: Respond to a follow-up question that changes one key assumption of your original argument; show explicitly how your reasoning changes.
# [[Material link]]: Combine two short sources that point in different directions and formulate a nuanced spoken conclusion.
# [[Error diagnosis]]: Analyse a weak sample response, identify whether the main problem is content, interaction/discourse or language, and design a targeted repair.
# [[Format comparison]]: Transform one written analytical paragraph into a flexible spoken response, then explain what had to change for dialogue.

<br>
<br>

{{BR}}
= Lernnachweis =

For a strong Lernnachweis, document:
# one timed spontaneous speaking task,
# one tandem or partner dialogue with peer feedback,
# one source-checked micro-argument,
# one error-analysis sheet with a revised second attempt,
# one short reflection explaining how paraphrasing, concession and clarification changed your interaction,
# one transfer task using unfamiliar material.

No public upload is required. Private recordings remain optional.

<br>
<br>

{{BR}}
= OERs zum Thema =

<iframe> https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation </iframe>

<br>

{{BR}}
= Verknüpfte Lernbereiche =

{| align=center
{{:D-Tab}}
'''[[ABI LF - Spontan auf Gegenargumente reagieren]]'''
# [[Kommunikationsprüfung]]
# [[Argumentation]]
# [[Aktives Zuhören]]
# [[Paraphrase]]
# [[Sprachmittlung]]
# [[Textanalyse]]
# [[Hörverstehen]]
# [[Sprechen]]
# [[Englisch]]
|}

[[Kategorie:Englisch]]
[[Kategorie:Oberstufe]]
[[Kategorie:Abitur]]
[[Kategorie:Baden-Württemberg]]
[[Kategorie:Leistungsfach]]
[[Kategorie:Kursstufe]]
[[Kategorie:Kommunikationsprüfung]]
[[Kategorie:Fremdsprache]]
[[Kategorie:Argumentation]]
[[Kategorie:Medienbildung]]

{{BR}}
= aiMOOC-Projekte =
[[Kategorie:AI_MOOC]] [[Kategorie:GPT aiMOOC]]
{{MT}}

ABI LF - Spontan auf Gegenargumente reagieren - Versionsgeschichte

Glanz: aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt