A recent survey conducted by Demopolis for Esperia revealed that a significant majority of Italians oppose the idea of boycotting the Maturità exams. The survey indicated that nearly 70% of respondents disapproved of students refusing to complete their oral exams as a form of protest, supporting the stance taken by Minister of Education Giuseppe Valditara, who advocates for increased commitment and seriousness in education.

The results showed that 68% found such protests unacceptable, while only 25% considered them legitimate. Additionally, 63% supported Valditara's decision to implement stricter rules next year, stating that students who boycott the exam would fail. This tough approach is particularly favored among center-right party supporters but also resonates with over one-third of voters from the Democratic Party (PD) and the Five Star Movement (M5S).

Furthermore, regarding mobile phone use in classrooms, an overwhelming 75% of Italians expressed a desire for a strict ban on cell phones during school hours.

Original article

The article provides an analysis of a survey's results, which offers some actionable insights for certain groups of people. It suggests that students should take their exams seriously and not boycott them, which is a clear message for students and their parents. Additionally, the survey's findings on mobile phone use in classrooms can guide schools and educators in implementing stricter policies.

However, the article does not delve deep into the educational aspects of these issues. It does not explore the reasons behind student protests or the potential impact of stricter rules on education quality. The survey results are presented as facts without much context or explanation, so readers may not fully understand the implications.

In terms of personal relevance, the article's content is quite relevant to students, parents, and educators, as it directly affects their educational experiences and decisions. The survey's findings on exam boycotts and mobile phone use can influence how students approach their studies and how schools are managed.

While the article does not explicitly provide a public service function, it indirectly contributes to public discourse by sharing the opinions of a significant number of Italians on education-related matters. This can inform policymakers and the public about the general sentiment towards certain educational practices.

The advice given in the article, such as taking exams seriously and implementing mobile phone bans, is practical and realistic for most people involved in the education system. It is clear and actionable, providing a straightforward approach to these issues.

In terms of long-term impact, the article's focus on educational practices and student attitudes can have lasting effects on the quality of education and the overall learning environment. Encouraging commitment and seriousness in education can lead to better academic outcomes and a more positive school culture.

Psychologically, the article may have a positive impact by reassuring educators and parents that their concerns about student commitment are shared by a significant portion of the population. It can also motivate students to take their studies more seriously, potentially improving their academic performance and future prospects.

The language used in the article is relatively neutral and does not appear to be driven by clickbait or sensationalism. It presents the survey results objectively, without exaggerating or dramatizing the findings.

In summary, the article provides actionable insights for students, parents, and educators, offers some personal relevance, and has the potential for positive long-term impact on education. However, it lacks depth in its educational analysis and does not explicitly serve a public service function. The language is not sensationalized, but the article could benefit from providing more context and explanation to enhance its educational value.

It is clear that the described actions and beliefs threaten the very foundation of strong families and the moral fabric that binds communities together. The proposed boycotts and protests, while seemingly aimed at addressing educational concerns, ultimately undermine the trust and responsibility that parents and elders have towards their children's education.

By encouraging students to refuse exams, these actions create a divide between generations, eroding the respect and commitment that should be fostered within families. The survey's results indicate a lack of understanding among a significant portion of the population regarding the importance of education and the role of personal responsibility. This disconnect weakens the ability of parents and guardians to guide and educate their children effectively, potentially leading to a decline in academic standards and a breakdown of family unity.

Furthermore, the desire for a strict ban on mobile phones during school hours, while seemingly a reasonable measure, could further isolate students from their families and communities. Mobile phones, when used responsibly, can be a tool for connection and learning. Banning them entirely may create a sense of distrust and suspicion, pushing students further away from their families and into a world of digital isolation.

The consequences of such behaviors, if left unchecked, are dire. A society that fails to educate and guide its youth effectively is one that risks losing its future. The breakdown of family cohesion and the shift of responsibilities onto external authorities or institutions will lead to a generation dependent on external systems, rather than their own kin and community. This dependence weakens the natural bonds of kinship and the ability to care for one's own, ultimately threatening the survival and continuity of the people.

To restore trust and responsibility, individuals must recognize the importance of their personal duties within the family and community. Parents and elders should take an active role in their children's education, guiding them towards a path of commitment and seriousness. Students, too, must understand the value of education and the impact their actions have on their own future and that of their community.

If these ideas and behaviors spread, families will become increasingly fragmented, and the birth rate may fall below replacement level. The land and its resources will be left unprotected, and the balance of life will be disrupted. It is the duty of every individual to uphold their responsibilities, not just for their own survival, but for the survival and prosperity of their kin and the land they call home.

"The survey indicated that nearly 70% of respondents disapproved of students refusing to complete their oral exams as a form of protest, supporting the stance taken by Minister of Education Giuseppe Valditara, who advocates for increased commitment and seriousness in education."

This sentence uses strong words like "disapproved" and "refusing" to create a negative image of the students' protest. It frames the students' actions as a personal choice to "refuse," which carries a negative connotation. The use of "disapproved" suggests a moral judgment, making it seem like the students are in the wrong. This bias favors the minister's stance and presents the students' actions in a negative light.

The text primarily conveys a sense of disapproval and opposition towards the idea of boycotting exams. This emotion is evident in the survey results, where a significant majority of Italians, approximately 70%, disapprove of students' protest actions. The strength of this emotion is highlighted by the use of words like "unacceptable" and "disapprove," indicating a strong negative sentiment towards the proposed boycott.

This disapproval serves to guide the reader's reaction by presenting a clear stance against the protest. It creates a sense of unity among Italians, as the majority share this sentiment, and aims to influence readers to align with this majority opinion. The emotion of disapproval is a powerful tool to shape public opinion, as it can evoke a sense of shared values and a desire to maintain order and respect for educational institutions.

The writer employs emotional language to persuade by using strong adjectives and adverbs. For instance, describing the protests as "unacceptable" and emphasizing the high percentage of respondents who "disapprove" adds weight to the argument against the boycott. Additionally, the writer's choice to include specific details, such as the support for Minister Valditara's stance and the breakdown of party supporters who favor a stricter approach, adds credibility and emotional impact to the message.

Furthermore, the text also conveys a sense of determination and support for stricter rules. This emotion is directed towards the Minister's decision to implement tougher measures for next year's exams. The strength of this emotion is reflected in the survey results, where 63% of respondents agree with the Minister's approach. This determination is likely intended to inspire confidence in the educational system and its ability to maintain standards.

The writer's use of repetition, by mentioning the Minister's name and his stance multiple times, reinforces the idea that there is a clear and decisive plan in place. This repetition adds emotional weight to the message, making it more memorable and impactful. By presenting a unified front, the writer aims to persuade readers that this is a necessary and justified course of action.

Lastly, the text reveals a strong desire for a strict ban on mobile phones in classrooms, with an overwhelming 75% of Italians supporting this measure. This emotion, a combination of frustration and a desire for control, is a powerful motivator. The writer's choice to include this detail adds a layer of complexity to the message, showing that Italians not only value education but also recognize the potential distractions and disruptions caused by mobile phones.

In conclusion, the text effectively utilizes emotions to guide the reader's reaction and persuade them of the validity of the arguments presented. By evoking emotions of disapproval, determination, and frustration, the writer aims to shape public opinion and influence educational policies. The strategic use of emotional language and persuasive techniques ensures that the message resonates with readers and leaves a lasting impression.