The exam consists of a written test (worth 45% of the final grade) and an oral exam (worth 55%). Passing the written test is a prerequisite for admission to the oral exam. The written test involves a short translation, using a dictionary, of a Latin text not studied in class, but similar in style, genre, and historical period. The oral exam includes: the translation and grammatical-syntactic analysis of one of the passages read and translated during the course (60% of the oral exam), followed by contextualization within its literary, historical, philological, and cultural framework (40% of the oral exam), and a final question covering all the texts in the syllabus. To pass the exam, students must give at least a satisfactory answer to each of the exam questions. Exams will be considered insufficient if it is evident that even a single required text has not been read. The written and oral components may not be taken on the same exam date. All regular and attending students enrolled in Letteratura Latina Magistrale B are exempt from the written test if they have already passed the written exam for Letteratura Latina Magistrale A in academic years 2021–22, 2022–23, 2023–24, or 2024–25.

The final exam consists of an oral test in three sections. The correct translation and analysis of morphological and syntactic structures of a section of the text on the syllabus will enable the assessment of the knowledge of the Greek language (60% weight in the exam evaluation); the interpretation of the text in the context of the themes discussed in the module, the discussion of possible didactic use of the text in school teaching, and the analysis of the historical and literary interpretation will enable the assessment of the knowledge of Greek history, of the history of Greek literature and of didactic methods (30 % weight in the exam evaluation). The knowledge of philological concepts will be tested through the interpretation of the critical apparatus of one of the editions used (10 % weight in the exam evaluation). A passing grade must be acquired in each section of the exam. The final grade will be based on the degree of knowledge and understanding of the texts and of the linguistic, literary, philological and didactic concepts, on the ability to apply knowledge to the text or to the proposed interpretation problem, and on the degree of expressive and communicative capacity. A grade with distinction ("lode") will be achieved by students who will show to be able of critical thinking and independent judgment concerning the contents of this course.

The final grade will derive from the results obtained in the two individual exams and will also take into consideration the overall level of knowledge, skills, and abilities acquired by the students. General Linguistics 2° level: The final exam will consist of an oral examination lasting approximately 30/40 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and skills outlined in the course objectives. During the interview, questions will be asked on the main theoretical topics covered in lectures and the reference bibliography. In addition, students will be asked to actively apply the knowledge and methodologies learned to the analysis of concrete linguistic data. This part will include a phonetic transcription exercise, morphological analysis, analysis of sentence syntactic structure, and the discussion of a case of linguistic change. For the final grade, the following will be evaluated: mastery of the fundamental concepts of the subject (45%), the ability to apply acquired knowledge to the description and analysis of concrete linguistic data or phenomena (45%), and clarity and use of scientific terminology in presenting arguments (10%). Cognitive Linguistics 2° level: The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). For both courses, the exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. The final grade of 30 cum laude will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology.

The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). The exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. A cum laude distinction will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology.

The final exam will consist of an oral examination lasting approximately 30/40 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and skills outlined in the course objectives. During the interview, questions will be asked on the main theoretical topics covered in lectures and the reference bibliography. In addition, students will be asked to actively apply the knowledge and methodologies learned to the analysis of concrete linguistic data. This part will include a phonetic transcription exercise, morphological decomposition, constituent analysis of sentence syntactic structure, and the discussion of a case of linguistic change. For the final grade, the following will be evaluated: mastery of the fundamental concepts of the subject (45%), the ability to apply acquired knowledge to the description and analysis of concrete linguistic data or phenomena (45%), and clarity and use of scientific terminology in presenting arguments (10%). Students will pass the exam if they achieve at least 18/30. The final grade of 30 cum laude will be awarded for a very in-depth knowledge demonstrated in relation to all topics covered during the interview, accompanied by a full mastery of the discipline's vocabulary.

The overall evaluation will take the final grades of the two individual exams into account and will be based on the assessment of the whole degree of insightfulness of knowledge, of the degree of autonomy in applying it and of the communicative skills, consistently with the mission and intended learning objectives. Cognitive Linguistics II level The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). The exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. A cum laude distinction will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology. Sociolinguistics The final exam is oral and takes approximately 30 minutes. Candidates will be expected to answer some questions showing knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics, and using appropriate scientific terminology. More precisely, the exam is structured as follows, namely it is made up of 3 sections: Sect. 1 = questions on theoretical and methodological aspects related to sociolinguistics; Sect. 2 = questions on language variation as influenced by external factors; Sect. 3 = analysis and discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and/or the material put on DIR). The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 20%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 35%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 35%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues concerning the relationship between language and society, and be able to analyze the relevant data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. Exams may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers.

The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). The exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. A cum laude distinction will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology.

The final exam is oral and takes approximately 30 minutes. Candidates will be expected to answer some questions showing knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics, and using appropriate scientific terminology. More precisely, the exam is structured as follows, namely it is made up of 3 sections: Sect. 1 = questions on theoretical and methodological aspects related to sociolinguistics; Sect. 2 = questions on language variation as influenced by external factors; Sect. 3 = analysis and discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and/or the material put on DIR). The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 20%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 35%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 35%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues concerning the relationship between language and society, and be able to analyze the relevant data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. Exams may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers.

The exam of the Teaching unit “DIDACTICS OF GEOGRAPHY” is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30. Teaching unit “ROMAN HISTORY 2° LEVEL” topics and the reading of the indicated bibliography will be verified through an oral examination for the evaluation of which (in thirtieths) the following parameters will be considered: knowledge and understanding of the required topics; relevance of the answers; organization, autonomy, clarity and effectiveness of the exhibition; ability to operate links, insights and synthesis; ability to refer to the historical sources.

The course topics and the reading of the indicated bibliography will be verified through an oral examination for the evaluation of which (in thirtieths) the following parameters will be considered: knowledge and understanding of the required topics; relevance of the answers; organization, autonomy, clarity and effectiveness of the exhibition; ability to operate links, insights and synthesis; ability to refer to the historical sources.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The exam is aimed at verifying the achievement of the learning objectives. The exam is structured in two parts that can be taken on a single day or in two consecutive or non-consecutive calls, at student’s discretion. First part A) Miller Barbara (2025), Antropologia Culturale (Third Italian edition), Milano, Pearson (only the chapters listed in the document “MANUALE MILLER - PARTI DA STUDIARE.PDF” available on DIR) and slides presented during course. The knowledge of the program will be evaluated by an e-test consisting in 30 multiple-choice questions. The e-test lasts 30 minutes. 1 point is given for each correct answer. This part of the exam will be considered successful with a minimum of 18 correct answers. Second part B) Aime Marco (2020), Classificare, separare, escludere. Razzismi e identità, Torino, Einaudi and slides presented during course. An oral or written presentation, depending on student’s preference, on two themes of the program determined by the teacher. During the exam the candidate will be tested on a topic decided by the teacher. Answers will also enable to test communication skills. The written test lasts 60 minutes; the oral test lasts 25 minutes approximately. The mark is expressed in thirtieths. The second part of the exam will be considered successful with a minimum score of 18 points. The final assessment is given by the average of the two partial marks and it is expressed according to the following criteria: - from 18 to 21/30: acceptable knowledge and comprehension of the basic concepts of the discipline, and of the ethnographic research field; sufficient ability to understand and to conceptualize the anthropological change which took place in Italy in the 20th century; fair ability to apply the acquired knowledge and to communicate the issues using an appropriate terminology; fair ability to acquire new skills; - From 22 to 25/30: the same items with a satisfactory performance; - From 26 to 28/30: the same items with a good performance; - From 29 to 30/30 (with possible honors): the same items with an excellent performance. The results of the first part will be announced on the DIR website (registration number + mark); the final mark will be notified on “Esse3 – Computer Services” e-platform. The candidate may review her/his test during office hours.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The exam of the Teaching unit “DIDACTICS OF GEOGRAPHY” is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30. The final examination of the Teaching unit “MEDIEVAL HISTORY ADVANCED LEVEL” will be an oral exam lasting approximately 20/30 minutes; for attending students, one of the questions will always focus on the analysis of a passage from one of the sources covered in class during the course. The aim is to test the knowledge included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes by means of an examination that includes questions on the main debates dealt with in the course, in order to verify: 1) the learning of basic notions; 2) the acquisition of a critical capacity in the analysis of problems; 3) the acquisition of a critical capacity in the use of sources; 4) the use of appropriate scientific terminology; 5) the ability to establish links between topics. In particular, the following weight will be given to the verification of the aforementioned achievement of the educational objectives: 1) 45%; 2) 15%; 3) 15%; 4) 10%; 5) 20%. Honours (lode) will be awarded on the basis of an assessment of the accuracy, depth and elaboration capacity of the answer.

The final examination will be an oral exam lasting approximately 20/30 minutes; for attending students, one of the questions will always focus on the analysis of a passage from one of the sources covered in class during the course. The aim is to test the knowledge included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes by means of an examination that includes questions on the main debates dealt with in the course, in order to verify: 1) the learning of basic notions; 2) the acquisition of a critical capacity in the analysis of problems; 3) the acquisition of a critical capacity in the use of sources; 4) the use of appropriate scientific terminology; 5) the ability to establish links between topics. In particular, the following weight will be given to the verification of the aforementioned achievement of the educational objectives: 1) 45%; 2) 15%; 3) 15%; 4) 10%; 5) 20%. Honours (lode) will be awarded on the basis of an assessment of the accuracy, depth and elaboration capacity of the answer.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The final mark will be awarded on the basis of the overall result of the examination, obtained by considering the results of the two partial examinations, which, although each one deals with the reference programme in its own specific way, have as common criteria the assessment of the degree of knowledge and comprehension of the texts in the programme, the ability to apply knowledge to the text or to the proposed interpretative problem, the degree of expressive, linguistic and argumentative competence, according to the parameters provided under ‘Learning objectives’. LETTERATURA ITALIANA MAGISTRALE I: The final exam consists of an oral examination, which will focus on the following points: 1. Verification of knowledge of the research found in 20th century Italian criticism, and in particular that which is to be found in the long generation born between 1920 and 1940, starting from the text adopted and indicated above and corresponding to 50% of the weight on the exam grade; 2. Testing of skills in examining and interpreting the critics and texts examined (with particular attention to the texts chosen and read by the teacher in the classroom) and at the same time of communication skills and potential for already expressing an autonomous critical capacity, starting with a question on a couple of specific essays, corresponding to 50% of the exam grade. At least acceptable answers to each of the questions will be required to pass the examination. LETTERATURA ITALIANA MAGISTRALE II: The final exam consists of a written exam, which will focus on the following points: 1. Verification of the ability to interpret texts (with particular attention to the course topic), and together with the communication skills and the ability to express judgments: a question on an issue, theme or problem among those addressed in the study of Ossi di seppia, in order to verify both the knowledge and the degree of in-depth analysis and critical reworking of the texts – 50% of the weight on the exam grade; 2. Verification of the ability to examine and interpret texts, to express judgments, and to apply oneself to the analysis of literary texts: a question consisting of the analysis and commentary of a text of Ossi di seppia, or of one among those anthologized in the file prepared by the teacher – 50% of the weight on the exam grade. To pass the exam, it will be necessary to answer each of the questions at least sufficiently.

The final exam consists of a written exam, which will focus on the following points: 1. Verification of the ability to interpret texts (with particular attention to the course topic), and together with the communication skills and the ability to express judgments: a question on an issue, theme or problem among those addressed in the study of Ossi di seppia, in order to verify both the knowledge and the degree of in-depth analysis and critical reworking of the texts – 50% of the weight on the exam grade; 2. Verification of the ability to examine and interpret texts, to express judgments, and to apply oneself to the analysis of literary texts: a question consisting of the analysis and commentary of a text of Ossi di seppia, or of one among those anthologized in the file prepared by the teacher – 50% of the weight on the exam grade. To pass the exam, it will be necessary to answer each of the questions at least sufficiently. The evaluation is based on the level of knowledge and understanding of the texts in the program, on the ability to apply the knowledge to the text or to the proposed interpretative problem, and on the level of expressive and communicative ability.

The final exam consists of an oral examination, which will focus on the following points: 1. Verification of knowledge of the research found in 20th century Italian criticism, and in particular that which is to be found in the long generation born between 1920 and 1940, starting from the text adopted and indicated above and corresponding to 50% of the weight on the exam grade; 2. Testing of skills in examining and interpreting the critics and texts examined (with particular attention to the texts chosen and read by the teacher in the classroom) and at the same time of communication skills and potential for already expressing an autonomous critical capacity, starting with a question on a couple of specific essays, corresponding to 50% of the exam grade. At least acceptable answers to each of the questions will be required to pass the examination.

Oral exam on the books listed in the bibliography and on texts archived in DIR. The exam of Italian Linguistics (12 cfu) lasts 40 minutes ca. However, the exam can be divided into two different parts lasting 20 minutes each, and corresponding to module I and module II (in this case the final grade will be the result of the average of the marks obtained in the two tests). The exam will be structured as follows: - Three or four questions on the history of the Italian lexicography and on the dictionaries listed in the program of the exam. Value 40% (basic level). - One question on electronic dictionaries, on Internet tools for lexicographers, on new lexicographic projects of the Accademia della Crusca, on didactic strategies for teaching ancient and modern Italian trough dictionaries. Value 10% (advanced level). - Two questions on the essay “L’idioma gentile” by De Amicis. Value 25% (basic level). - [@ attending students] The teacher will comment on the written exercise delivered by the student at the end of the lessons (digital philology exercise on the critical electronic edition of the DM by Panzini). Value 25% (advanced level). [@students who CANNOT attend the course: four questions concerning the “questione della lingua” from Dante to the present time]. The oral presentation and the dialectic conversation with the teacher will be assessed.

Oral exam on the lessons topics and on the materials indicated in the bibliography. For attending students who will deliver the written exercise in digital philology, the exam has an average duration of 10 minutes. The oral exam will take place as follows: - Two questions on the essay “L’idioma gentile” by De Amicis (the oral presentation and the dialectic conversation with the teacher will be assessed). Value 50% (= basic level). - The teacher will comment on the written exercise delivered by the student at the end of the lessons: exercises in digital philology. Value 50% (= advanced level). For students who CANNOT attend the course, the exam lasts an average of 20 minutes. The oral exam will take place as follows: - Two questions on the essay “L’idioma gentile” by De Amicis (the oral presentation and the dialectic conversation with the teacher will be assessed). Value 40% (= basic level). - One question concerning the “questione della lingua” before the political Unification of Italy. Value 20% (= advanced level). - Three questions concerning the “questione della lingua” after the political Unification of Italy, in the XX century and in the present days. Value 40% (two correct answers are required to achive a basic level).

Oral exam on the books listed in the bibliography. The exam lasts 20 minutes ca. Students will be asked to answer four or five questions structured as follows in order to value the achievement of the above objectives: - Three or four questions on the history of the Italian lexicography and on the dictionaries listed in the program of the exam. Value 60% (= basic level). - One question on electronic dictionaries, on Internet tools for lexicographers, on new lexicographic projects of the Accademia della Crusca, on didactic strategies for teaching ancient and modern Italian trough dictionaries. Value 20% (= advanced level). - The oral presentation and the dialectical conversation with the teacher will be assessed. Value 20%.

The overall evaluation will take the final grades of the two individual exams into account and will be based on the assessment of the whole degree of insightfulness of knowledge, of the degree of autonomy in applying it and of the communicative skills, consistently with the mission and intended learning objectives. Cognitive Linguistics II level The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). The exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. A cum laude distinction will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology. Advanced Historical Linguistics The final exam consists of an oral examination lasting approximately 30 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics (those included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes) and the use of appropriate scientific terminology through a 3-section structure: Sect. 1 = questions on fundamental issues concerning historical pragmatics, with a focus on the different pragmatic phenomena analyzed; Sect. 2 = discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and put on DIR); Sect. 3 = didactic methodologies for teaching linguistics. The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 10%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve 18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues relating to the investigation of languages from a historical-pragmatic perspective and be able to analyze relevant linguistic data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. The exam may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers.

The final exam is an oral assessment lasting approximately 30 minutes. Students will be asked questions covering topics from lectures and the core bibliography. This aims to check their understanding of the course objectives and expected learning outcomes. At least one question will focus on describing a specific case where the cognitive approach is applied to study past linguistic situations or analyze linguistic changes. The final grade will be based on: mastery of fundamental concepts (50%); ability to apply acquired knowledge to describe or analyze concrete linguistic phenomena (35%); use of scientific terminology when presenting arguments (15%). The exam will be passed with a minimum score of 18/30. A cum laude distinction will be awarded for demonstrating a very in-depth understanding of all topics discussed during the exam, along with full mastery of the discipline’s terminology.

The final exam consists of an oral examination lasting approximately 30 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics (those included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes) and the use of appropriate scientific terminology through a 3-section structure: Sect. 1 = questions on fundamental issues concerning historical pragmatics, with a focus on the different pragmatic phenomena analyzed; Sect. 2 = discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and put on DIR); Sect. 3 = didactic methodologies for teaching linguistics. The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 10%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve 18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues relating to the investigation of languages from a historical-pragmatic perspective and be able to analyze relevant linguistic data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. The exam may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers.

Students can choose between the written and oral forms of examination. Both in the oral and written form the exam will consist of two parts: 1) One or more questions on the issues addressed in the volume edited by Emanuele Zinato Insegnare la letteratura; 2) Reading, paraphrase, metric-rhythmic, stylistic-rhetorical and thematic analysis of a poetic text among those examined in class; overall comment on the poem and proposal for its didactic rendering in a given school context: how would you present this poem to the class (with specification of the type of school and year)? The Student is thus required to demonstrate: 1. KNOWLEDGE Critical knowledge of the main issues relating to the teaching of literature in secondary school, between the constraints of norms and manuals and the encounter between imaginations in the reading experience. Knowledge of the main issues of theory of literature and literary criticism, and the main methods and tools of analysis, understanding, and sharing of the literary work in the light of their didactic application, with particular attention to the reading and writing of the poetic text. Knowledge of the basic elements of Italian metrics, the main verses and the main strophic forms. Knowledge of some exemplary texts of the Italian poetic tradition, of their metric-rhythmic, stylistic, rhetorical and thematic characteristics and the most effective methods of their teaching. 2. SKILLS Ability to analyze a poetic work by understanding its compositional, metric-rhythmic, stylistic, rhetorical and thematic characteristics; Ability to to transmit these skills in teaching. Ability to write and ability to teach writing an Italian verse based on its rhythmic structure. 3. (TRANSVERSAL SKILLS) - ability to present information and opinions clearly and convincingly, using the appropriate language and terminology. In particular, the following weight will be given to the verification of the achievement of the aforementioned training objectives: 1. 40%; 2. 40%; 3. 20%. N.B. The evaluation of the written exam will also include grammatical correctness (orthography, morphology, syntax).

For the first teaching unit: The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30. For the second teaching unit the evaluation will take place both during the seminar part and during the final oral exam. As for the seminar part, not only the presentation made by each student will be evaluated but also the involvement during the other presentations and the participation in the discussion to compare the different national cases and find an overall reading. The final grade will be determined as follows: 50% oral exam 25% presentation 25% participation during the seminar. The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude. The final grade is calculated using a (weighted) average of the assessments for the individual modules.

The evaluation will take place both during the seminar part and during the final oral exam. As for the seminar part, not only the presentation made by each student will be evaluated but also the involvement during the other presentations and the participation in the discussion to compare the different national cases and find an overall reading. The final grade will be determined as follows: 50% oral exam 25% presentation 25% participation during the seminar. The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The course consists of 2 modules, and each module has its own specific assessment method. “Storia moderna magistrale”: Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and specifically the historiographical debate and the case studies focused upon gender, sexuality violence and social control (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. “Didattica della geografia”. The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and specifically the historiographical debate and the case studies focused upon gender, sexuality violence and social control (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The course consists of 2 modules, and each module has its own specific assessment method. “Storia ambientale”: Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of a complete control of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics, with an autonomous approach to methodology. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and the main issues of environmental history in early modern and modern period (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. “Didattica della geografia”: The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30. The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. There will be an overall evaluation which will take the respective final grades into account and will be based on the assessment of the whole degree of insightfulness of knowledge and of the degree of autonomy in applying it. The overall assessment could take into account the student's ability to improve their skills in answering questions and their general ability to organize their work.

Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of a complete control of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics, with an autonomous approach to methodology. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and the main issues of environmental history in early modern and modern period (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude.

The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude. The seminar and the final exam will be held in English.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The overall evaluation will take the final grades of the two individual exams into account and will be based on the assessment of the whole degree of insightfulness of knowledge, of the degree of autonomy in applying it and of the communicative skills, consistently with the mission and intended learning objectives. Advanced Historical Linguistics The final exam consists of an oral examination lasting approximately 30 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics (those included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes) and the use of appropriate scientific terminology through a 3-section structure: Sect. 1 = questions on fundamental issues concerning historical pragmatics, with a focus on the different pragmatic phenomena analyzed; Sect. 2 = discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and put on DIR); Sect. 3 = didactic methodologies for teaching linguistics. The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 10%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve 18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues relating to the investigation of languages from a historical-pragmatic perspective and be able to analyze relevant linguistic data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. Exams may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers. Advanced Romance Philology Learning will be assessed both during the course and through a final exam. The evaluation will be based on the following points: 1. During the seminar, students are expected to actively participate in the lectures and discussions; 2. Students will be required to prepare an edition specimen of an unpublished medieval text, which will be presented and discussed in class; 3. Students must study a general reference volume, to be agreed upon with the instructor; 4. Students must submit a brief report (approximately 2 pages) on a book or a selection of articles read independently, as agreed with the instructor; 5. The oral exam will conclude the assessment process, during which the student will present the work they have carried out. Weighting of each component for the final grade: • Point 1: 10% • Point 2: 30% • Point 3: 20% • Point 4: 20% • Point 5: 20% Honors ("cum laude") will be awarded based on the depth and originality of the written work and the oral exam.

The final exam consists of an oral examination lasting approximately 30 minutes, aimed at verifying the acquisition of knowledge and understanding of the relevant topics (those included in the objectives and the expected learning outcomes) and the use of appropriate scientific terminology through a 3-section structure: Sect. 1 = questions on fundamental issues concerning historical pragmatics, with a focus on the different pragmatic phenomena analyzed; Sect. 2 = discussion of data on which to test both the theoretical and methodological knowledge acquired and the ability of applying it empirically (mainly on the basis of the material examined during the course and put on DIR); Sect. 3 = didactic methodologies for teaching linguistics. The final evaluation will be based on the following criteria: use of appropriate scientific terminology = 10%; answers to questions from Section 1 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 2 = 40%; answers to questions from Section 3 = 10%. The exam will be passed successfully if the final grade is equal to or higher than 18/30. To achieve 18/30, students must be familiar with the main issues relating to the investigation of languages from a historical-pragmatic perspective and be able to analyze relevant linguistic data at least at a basic level. To obtain a higher mark, students must demonstrate autonomy of judgment, consistent argumentation and depth of analysis. The exam may be passed with a full grade (30/30) “cum laude” in the case of high accuracy in all answers.

Learning will be assessed both during the course and through a final exam. The evaluation will be based on the following points: 1. During the seminar, students are expected to actively participate in the lectures and discussions; 2. Students will be required to prepare an edition specimen of an unpublished medieval text, which will be presented and discussed in class; 3. Students must study a general reference volume, to be agreed upon with the instructor; 4. Students must submit a brief report (approximately 2 pages) on a book or a selection of articles read independently, as agreed with the instructor; 5. The oral exam will conclude the assessment process, during which the student will present the work they have carried out. Weighting of each component for the final grade: • Point 1: 10% • Point 2: 30% • Point 3: 20% • Point 4: 20% • Point 5: 20% Honors ("cum laude") will be awarded based on the depth and originality of the written work and the oral exam.

For both courses there is an oral exam; the exam will be passed when the grade is equal to or greater than 18/30. During the exam it is possible to withdraw and at the end of the exam reject the grade if positive; the grade will be accepted sitting standing is no longer modifiable. According to Art. 35 of the Athenaeum Didactic Reg., the student may appear for the same examination no more than three times in an academic year. The final evaluation of the integrated exam will take into account the marks obtained in the single tests of the two teaching units of which it is composed and the evaluation of the overall degree of in-depth knowledge, autonomy in their application and communication skills, as specified by the training objectives and expected learning outcomes. In particular: Teaching unit Applied Linguistics A 2nd level: Oral exam lasting approximately 30-40 minutes. The overall grade will be based on assessment of the appropriate use of the specific metalanguage (33%), the accuracy and appropriateness of responses to questions on the texts indicated in the syllabus (33%), and the activities completed (including oral and written reports and essays) during class (34%). The overall grade will be based on assessment of the appropriate use of the specific metalanguage and the accuracy and appropriateness of responses to questions on the texts indicated in the syllabus and in class, as well as on the paper presented by each student during the course. Honors will be awarded based on assessment of in-depth analysis and independent development skills in both the written paper and the oral exam. . Teaching Unit Advanced Romance Philology: Learning will be assessed both during the course and through a final exam. The evaluation will be based on the following points: 1. During the seminar, students are expected to actively participate in the lectures and discussions; 2. Students will be required to prepare an edition specimen of an unpublished medieval text, which will be presented and discussed in class; 3. Students must study a general reference volume, to be agreed upon with the instructor; 4. Students must submit a brief report (approximately 2 pages) on a book or a selection of articles read independently, as agreed with the instructor; 5. The oral exam will conclude the assessment process, during which the student will present the work they have carried out. Weighting of each component for the final grade: • Point 1: 10% • Point 2: 30% • Point 3: 20% • Point 4: 20% • Point 5: 20% Honors (um laude) will be awarded based on the depth and originality of the written work and the oral exam.

Oral exam lasting approximately 30-40 minutes. A pass is considered a pass if the grade is 18/30 or higher. Pursuant to Article 35 of the University Teaching Regulations, students may take the same exam no more than three times in an academic year. Students may withdraw during the exam and reject their grade at the end of the exam if they pass; a grade accepted immediately cannot be changed. The overall grade will be based on the assessment of the appropriate use of the specific metalanguage (33%), the accuracy and appropriateness of responses to questions on the texts indicated in the syllabus (33%), and the activities completed (including oral and written reports and essays) during class (34%). The overall grade will be based on the assessment of the appropriate use of the specific metalanguage and the accuracy and appropriateness of responses to questions on the texts indicated in the syllabus and in class, as well as on the paper presented by each student during the course. Honors will be awarded based on an evaluation of in-depth analysis and independent development skills in both the written paper and the oral exam.

Learning will be assessed both during the course and through a final exam. The evaluation will be based on the following points: 1. During the seminar, students are expected to actively participate in the lectures and discussions; 2. Students will be required to prepare an edition specimen of an unpublished medieval text, which will be presented and discussed in class; 3. Students must study a general reference volume, to be agreed upon with the instructor; 4. Students must submit a brief report (approximately 2 pages) on a book or a selection of articles read independently, as agreed with the instructor; 5. The oral exam will conclude the assessment process, during which the student will present the work they have carried out. Weighting of each component for the final grade: • Point 1: 10% • Point 2: 30% • Point 3: 20% • Point 4: 20% • Point 5: 20% Honors ("cum laude") will be awarded based on the depth and originality of the written work and the oral exam.

construction and presentation of a teaching project on the use of digital resources

The integrated exam consists of two partial exams: Geography and Greek History, each with its own specific requirements. The exam for the "GEOGRAPHY TEACHING" teaching unit will be a written exam lasting one hour. For attending students, the exam will cover the topics covered during the course, to be developed as a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the exam consists of six questions and a request to answer five of them on the following topics: 1) assessment of acquired knowledge of the proposed bibliography, in relation to the main teaching methodologies; 2) assessment of the ability to apply the acquired knowledge and its understanding, with reference to appropriate geographical categories; 3) assessment of the ability to express critical judgments on teaching tools and methodologies, including through an analysis of the bibliography provided in the syllabus; 4) assessment of the ability to effectively communicate the concepts and arguments learned and to summarize complex problems. The answers, both in content and formulation, will also allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of the study undertaken and the proper organization of the work, especially individual work. Grades are expressed in thirtieths and are evaluated according to the following parameters: 1) Knowledge and understanding of the main concepts and contexts covered, and clarity of exposition: 18 points out of 30 (pass); 2) Ability to approach geographical literature and teaching tools for the subject, with particular reference to the main conceptual issues, the use of technology, and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) Ability to independently establish thematic and/or methodological connections and to employ terminology specific to the subject area: 6 points out of 30. In the Greek History exam, attending students will be asked questions that assess their knowledge of the topics covered in depth in class, while non-attending students will be asked one of the three questions regarding their syllabus. The exam will assess knowledge of the syllabus topics (objectives 1-2); judgment (objective 3); use of appropriate terminology (objective 4); and, finally, acquisition of an appropriate study method (objective 5). A passing grade of 18/30 is required for each module, and the grade recorded will be the average of the two partial grades. Students are free to take the two partial exams in any order they prefer, even on different exam dates.

The exam is usually held in oral form and consists of three questions; attending students will be asked questions that will verify the knowledge of the topics addressed during the lessons. Non-attending students will also have a question on the text by A. Angius, Le rivolte degli schiavi in Sicilia, Castelvecchi 2020. At the request of attending and non-attending students, the exam can also be held in written form, through the administration of three open-ended questions, which will ascertain complete knowledge of the discipline and the student's ability to accurately describe the historical facts, using appropriate language, which is also suitable in a school lesson. The request to take the exam in written form must be submitted at the time of registration for the exam. The exam will verify knowledge of the topics in the program (objectives 1-2); the ability to judge (objective 3), the use of appropriate terminology (objective 4); finally, the acquisition of an appropriate study method (objective 5). The outcome will be positive, if the vote of 18/30 is reached, to achieve which the student will have to demonstrate that they have understood the essential aspects of the topics covered. To arrive at a full grade, equal to 30/30, students will have to reach. Full knowledge and understanding of historical facts and related sources, the ability to place them in the right context and the ability to present their knowledge in appropriate language. In the final evaluation the first skill will weigh for 80%, the second and third for 10% each.

The exam is written and will last one hour. For those attending the test will cover the topics proposed during the course to be developed in the form of a Learning Unit. For non-attending students, the test consists of six questions and the requirement to answer five of them on the following points: 1) checking the acquired knowledge on topics treated in bibliography proposed on the teaching methodologies (example of question: “How the textbook is a teaching resource for geography?”); 2) check of the ability to apply knowledge and its understanding, by contextualizing the main examined phenomena in an appropriate geographical framework (example of question: “Illustrate how story maps and digital storytelling are useful resources for geography teaching”) 3) check of the ability in expressing critical opinions on tools and teaching methodologies, also through an analysis of the bibliography proposed (example of question: What are the main features of CLIL?”); 4) check of the ability in communicating acquired knowledge and in organizing a synthetic presentation of the main problems (example of question: “What are the main characteristics of geographical competence development through the flipped classroom?”). The grade is expressed in thirtieths and the evaluation is carried out according to the following parameters: 1) knowledge and understanding of the basic notions and contexts treated in the course and their clear exposition: 18 points out of 30 (sufficiency); 2) ability to frame the geographical literature and tools for teaching the discipline with particular reference to the main conceptual nodes, the use of technology and the specific role of the teacher: 6 points out of 30; 3) adequate skill in connecting subjects and methodological approaches as well as in using scientific terminology associated to the discipline: 6 points out of 30.

The final exam consists of an oral examination that will focus on the following points: knowledge of essential data relating to the authors and works in the program (weight 33% of the final grade); knowledge of essential data relating to literary history (standard question: "in what historical, geographical and performance context was one of the literary works in the program presented to the ancient public?") (weight 33% of the final grade); ability to establish connections and formulate judgments on the works in the program (weight 33% of the final grade). The final grade will be based on the degree of knowledge and understanding of the texts and essential concepts, on the ability to understand a text or tackle the proposed interpretative problem, and on the degree of expressive and communicative ability. Honors are achieved when one demonstrates having acquired a capacity for profound and autonomous critical reflection with respect to the contents of the course.

The exam consists of a written test in Latin (60% of the final grade) and an oral exam in literature (40% of the final grade). The written test is designed to assess knowledge of Latin morphology with elements of syntax (60% of the weight of the written test) and the ability to translate a Latin prose text (40% of the weight of the written test). The written test lasts a total of 3 hours and includes: A grammar test (without a dictionary), lasting 2 hours. A translation from Latin to Italian (with a dictionary), lasting 1 hour. To pass the test, students must obtain a passing grade (18/30) in both parts. However, this comprehensive written test can be replaced by THREE in-progress assessments held during class hours. Students who take all three assessments and achieve an average score equal to or higher than 18/30 will be directly admitted to the oral exam. Those who take two assessments and achieve an average between 16 and 18/30 will not have to retake the written test but will be required to complete a grammar supplement (agreed upon with the professor) directly during the oral exam. Only ATTENDING* students may take the oral literature exam even BEFORE passing the written test. Non-attending students must first take the written test and then the oral literature exam. It is NOT possible to take both the written and oral exams on the same exam date. Students are encouraged to consult the course page on the DIR platform, where examples of written tests can be found.

The course consists of 2 modules, and each module has its own specific assessment method. “Storia contemporanea magistrale”: The evaluation will take place both during the seminar part and during the final oral exam. As for the seminar part, not only the presentation made by each student will be evaluated but also the involvement during the other presentations and the participation in the discussion to compare the different national cases and find an overall reading. The final grade will be determined as follows: 50% oral exam 25% presentation 25% participation during the seminar. The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude. “Storia moderna magistrale”: Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and specifically the historiographical debate and the case studies focused upon gender, sexuality violence and social control (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. There will be an overall evaluation which will take the respective final grades into account and will be based on the assessment of the whole degree of insightfulness of knowledge and of the degree of autonomy in applying it. The overall assessment could take into account the student's ability to improve their skills in answering questions and their general ability to organize their work.

The evaluation will take place both during the seminar part and during the final oral exam. As for the seminar part, not only the presentation made by each student will be evaluated but also the involvement during the other presentations and the participation in the discussion to compare the different national cases and find an overall reading. The final grade will be determined as follows: 50% oral exam 25% presentation 25% participation during the seminar. The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude.

Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and specifically the historiographical debate and the case studies focused upon gender, sexuality violence and social control (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded.

Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and specifically the historiographical debate and the case studies focused upon gender, sexuality violence and social control (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded.

The evaluation will be determined by the following elements: - a general knowledge of concepts and events as a set of notions without a conceptual link between them, with the use of inappropriate language in oral discussion, will be considered sufficient. The only presentation of one's case study without interaction in the seminar part will be considered just enough. Corresponding vote: 18-22 - A more in-depth but not detailed knowledge of concepts and events, with the use of a language generally appropriate to the topic being discussed, will be considered discreet. The interaction in the seminar part with the cases presented by the other participants, making comparisons and references with one's own case study, will be considered discreet. Corresponding vote: 22-26. - An in-depth knowledge, showing a good understanding of the relationships between different phenomena and the ability to use the notions learned autonomously, applying them to different events, will be judged as satisfactory. It will be judged fully satisfactory if the student shows an ability to speak of the texts he has read with independent judgement, enucleating the author's point of view and dialoguing with it in a critical way. The interaction during the seminar part that demonstrates the will to elaborate a general interpretation of the phenomenon including all the case studies will be considered excellent. Corresponding grade: 27-30 cum laude. The seminar and the final exam will be held in English.

The course consists of both modules "History of cultural heritage" and "Environmental history". The examination of the achievement of the learning outcomes are the same for both modules: an oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions for each module and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and the main issues of history of cultural heritage, and of environmental history (as indicated in the contents). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded. These criteria apply to both modules. The overall assessment of the examination could take into account the student's ability to improve their ability to answer questions and their general ability to organise their work.

Oral exam, about 20 minutes. The questions will assess: the student's ability to contextualize the topics learned in time and space; the acquisition of an organic vision of the disciplinary issues; the ability to use them into a coherent and correct exposition, also with a scientific language; the personal critical elaboration of the topics. The exam is divided into 3-4 questions and concerns on the indicated bibliography, as well as for students attending, on the topics discussed during the lessons. The questions will concern the content of the textbooks and the main issues of history of cultural heritage, and the topic on contested cultural heritage (as indicated in the content). Vote, expressed in thirtieths, takes place on the basis of the following parameters: 1) knowledge of the fundamental notions of bibliography and, for attending students, of the topics covered during the lessons (20 points out of 30); 2) reasoning skills critic on the topics (5 points out of 30); 3) ability to express and communicate, and to use a scientific language (5 points out of 30). The exam will be successful if the sum of 18/30 is reached or exceeded.