エンゲージメントプロジェクト
国際バカロレア · IB Diploma · Global Politics · SL トピック 3 4:18 英語ナレーション・英語＋中文字幕 burning-in
章
Transcript
Every evening in Chinese cities, millions of food-delivery riders race the clock.
每天晚上，中国城市里数百万外卖骑手在和时间赛跑。
An app sets their routes, their time limits and their pay.
一个应用程序决定他们的路线、时限和报酬。
Who decided those rules, and who can change them?
这些规则是谁定的，谁能改变？
A local scene like this, connected to a global debate, is what an engagement project studies.
这种与全球争论相连的本地场景，正是参与式项目要研究的。
You choose a political issue, engage with it outside the classroom, research it, and write a report of up to two thousand words.
你选择一个政治议题，在课堂外参与其中，进行研究，并写一份不超过两千词的报告。
It is worth thirty per cent at standard level and twenty at higher level.
它在标准级占 30%，高级占 20%。
Higher-level students also write a recommendation of about four hundred words.
高级学生还要另写一份约四百词的建议。
An issue is political when it is about power: who decides, who benefits and who pays.
一个议题涉及权力时才是政治性的：谁决定、谁受益、谁买单。
Plastic in the ocean is a topic.
“海洋里的塑料”只是话题。
Who should pay to clean plastic from our coast, the city, the companies that make it, or the people who buy it, is a political issue.
“谁该为清理我们海岸的塑料买单：城市、生产塑料的公司，还是购买者？” 才是政治议题。
A good issue passes three tests. It is debatable: different groups really disagree. It is globally connected: a local example of a global debate. And it is engageable: you can actually meet people, visit places or join activities.
好的议题要通过三项检验：有争议，不同群体确实存在分歧；与全球相关，是全球争论的本地例子；可参与，你确实能见到相关的人、去相关的地方或参加活动。
Turn the issue into a question with one or two key concepts.
把议题变成包含一两个关键概念的问题。
Are delivery apps good is weak.
“外卖应用好不好”很弱。
How do platforms use power over riders in my city, and how far do recent rules protect their rights, is strong.
“外卖平台如何对本市骑手行使权力，近期的规定在多大程度上保护了他们的权利”就很强。
Is pollution bad becomes: how far has the river clean-up gained legitimacy with residents?
“污染坏不坏”变成：“本区的河道治理在多大程度上获得了居民的认可（合法性）？”
Engagement is first-hand experience of the issue.
参与是对议题的第一手经历。
It must be purposeful, chosen to answer your question, and recorded. And it must be ethical: ask for informed consent before an interview, keep people anonymous if they ask, and never put anyone at risk.
它必须有目的，为回答你的问题而选择；必须有记录；还必须合乎伦理：访谈前征得知情同意，对方要求时保持匿名，绝不让任何人陷入风险。
Research adds published sources: official documents, statistics, news and academic studies.
研究补充已发表的资料：官方文件、统计数据、新闻和学术研究。
Compare the perspectives of the government, a company, the people affected, and independent experts.
比较政府、企业、受影响者和独立专家的视角。
Then evaluate: whose view has evidence, whose serves its own interests, and whose voice is missing?
然后评价：谁的观点有证据，谁的观点服务于自身利益，谁的声音缺席？
Think of two streams.
把它想成两条支流。
The issue splits into engagement, what you see and hear, and research, what the sources say.
议题分成参与（你的所见所闻）和研究（资料怎么说）。
The two meet in your analysis, where you weigh one against the other.
两者在分析中汇合，你在这里相互比较。
Reflection then names what you learned and the limits of your evidence.
最后的反思说明你学到了什么，以及证据的局限。
The report has five parts. The issue, why it is political and how it links to a global debate. Research. Engagement. Analysis, which applies the key concepts and compares what people told you with the documents. And reflection: what engagement showed that reading could not, the limits of your evidence, and how your own position shaped it.
报告分五部分：议题，说明为何具有政治性、如何与全球争论相连；研究；参与；分析，运用关键概念，把人们告诉你的与文件所说的进行比较；反思：参与揭示了哪些阅读无法得到的东西、证据的局限，以及你自身立场的影响。
A worked example.
一个例子。
Engagement: interviews with six riders at a rest station, with consent and without names; a talk at a rider service centre; two hours watching pick-ups.
参与：在休息站访谈六名骑手，事先征得同意且不用真名；在骑手服务中心交谈；观察取餐两小时。
Research: the 2021 national guidelines on riders' rights, platform statements, news reports, and a study from another country.
研究：2021 年关于骑手权益的国家指导意见、平台声明、新闻报道，以及另一国的研究。
Analysis.
分析。
The app's algorithm sets the agenda, a hidden face of power: riders cannot negotiate times, only accept or refuse.
应用程序的算法设定议程，这是权力的隐性维度：骑手无法协商时限，只能接单或拒单。
The guidelines gained legitimacy when they produced visible changes, like longer time limits, but pay per order still depends on the platform.
指导意见在带来看得见的变化（如延长时限）时获得了骑手的认可，但每单报酬仍由平台决定。
And interdependence is asymmetric: each rider depends far more on the platform.
相互依存是不对称的：每个骑手对平台的依赖远大于平台对他的依赖。
Reflection.
反思。
Six riders at one station are not all riders. Riders may not speak freely to a student. And the platforms did not agree to an interview, so their view comes only from public statements.
一个站点的六名骑手不代表所有骑手；骑手面对学生未必畅所欲言；平台不接受采访，所以它们的观点只来自公开声明。
At higher level, add an evidence-based recommendation, such as publishing how delivery times are calculated.
高级学生还要加上一条有证据支持的建议，比如公开配送时限的计算方法。
To finish: a political, debatable, globally connected and engageable issue; a question built on key concepts; purposeful, recorded and ethical engagement; research that weighs perspectives; and a report in five parts, ending in honest reflection.
总结：一个有政治性、有争议、与全球相关且可参与的议题；以关键概念构建的问题；有目的、有记录、合乎伦理的参与；权衡各方视角的研究；以及以诚实反思结尾的五部分报告。