group "english practice"

[teacher]

Here is my summary of the third text :

This text, untitled « Left behind » is an extract from the American program Public Broadcasting Service. President Bush and Clarence page, a journalist from the Chicago tribune seize the opportunity of the hurricane Katarina disaster to define the root of poverty in the American society.

According to the president, poverty is strongly linked to racial discrimination and takes its origin deep in history as white and black people never had the same opportunities in the Promised Land.

Clarence Page qualifies this point of view which remains too superficial and doesn’t fit reality. For him, poverty has nothing to do with race or with the color of the skin. The president’s point of view can be explained by the fact that numerous black people are poor. Moreover they live in big cities like New Orleans, so in this town the poor are black people but in fact America counts more white poor than black’s.

This confusion is although brought by the fact that New Orleans population is mostly composed of the black community among which you can find wealthy people as well as poor. The wealthier are not brought out by media as they left the city before the disaster. Only the poor black left behind remains.

So poverty has nothing to do with race but it rather deals with income and opportunity.

Speaking about race and class disturbs the Americans because it doesn’t match with the ideal of equality which is the basement of their society. As they think to be a united people that has reduced class or race differences, they are affected by the poverty that was highlighted after the devastation. This burst of reality makes them feel depressed.

(I had lots of difficulties to sum up the tree last paragraphs of the text.)

the poor Whites ??

[teacher]

quote Ylonave

the Clarence Page's one

-he agrees

-his arguments

-examples

-his remarks

-poverty concerns

-percentage of blacks

-consequences

-especialy

-remind

[csand]

Here is my summary of the third text :

This text, untitled « Left behind » is an extract from the American program Public Broadcasting Service. President Bush and Clarence page, a journalist from the Chicago tribune seize the opportunity of the hurricane Katarina disaster to define the root of poverty in the American society.

According to the president, poverty is strongly linked to racial discrimination and takes its origin deep in history as white and black people never had the same opportunities in the Promised Land.

Clarence Page qualifies this point of view which remains too superficial and doesn’t fit reality. For him, poverty has nothing to do with race or with the color of the skin. The president’s point of view can be explained by the fact that numerous black people are poor. Moreover they live in big cities like New Orleans, so in this town the poor are black people but in fact America counts more white poor than black’s.

This confusion is although brought by the fact that New Orleans population is mostly composed of the black community among which you can find wealthy people as well as poor. The wealthier are not brought out by media as they left the city before the disaster. Only the poor black left behind remains.

So poverty has nothing to do with race but it rather deals with income and opportunity.

Speaking about race and class disturbs the Americans because it doesn’t match with the ideal of equality which is the basement of their society. As they think to be a united people that has reduced class or race differences, they are affected by the poverty that was highlighted after the devastation. This burst of reality makes them feel depressed.

(I had lots of difficulties to sum up the tree last paragraphs of the text.)

the poor Whites ??

here's is my correction :

as they think that are a united people

three last paragraphs

more poor Whites than Blacks

[foufinson]

Don't quiet Teacher my sentence was humorous.

[csand]

hello

text n°4 from Aix-marseille 2006

summary:

The document we have to study is entitled "Education quandary".

We haven't any detail about its origin and author. The text deals with the problem of childrens education.

It is divided into three parts.

After a question about the necessary to debate the problem of parental responsability, the writer presents a short description of the situation. He explains the fact that school spend time and effort to educate childrens but without parents's support, this work is maden in vain.

Then, according to the author the debate about parental responsability must be start.

Next, he proposes a succession of questions to open the thought into different orientations, to find a solution.

As a conclusion, he makes a comparaison between parents and pupils in school and indicates that the most important to give someone the desire to progress, to succeed, is encouragement, respect, whatever the age.

I agree with this conclusion because I think to help parents is better than to blame them, to find a solution.

To my mind, parent's sanctions, television or magazines's messages cannot have influence and on the contrary they can agrave the situation and the feeling of exclusion.

For next week, I'll work on the text n°5 from aix-marseille.

Have a good week.

Bye

I allow myself to corrext some mistakes. I will write my summary for this text, so do not hesitate to do the same . It's easier to correct the other's mistakes

I will have used "make the situation worse" instead of "aggravate"

In the plural, "child" gives "children" . You don't have to add a "s"

[ludi]

Hi everybody

I'm back...

I've not read the all thread if someone can give me the link of the text to summ up

thx

see you

[teacher]

Don't quiet Teacher my sentence was humorous.

You mean " don't worry" !!;-)

[teacher]

Hi everybody

I'm back...

I've not read the all thread if someone can give me the link of the text to summ up

thx

see you

Welcome back , ludi

The group is on text n°5

http://www.ac-aix-marseille.fr/public/jsp/...jsp?page_id=454

[teacher]

hello

text n°4 from Aix-marseille 2006

summary:

The document we have to study is entitled "Education quandary".

We haven't any detail about its origin and author. The text deals with the problem of childrens education.

It is divided into three parts.

After a question about the necessary to debate the problem of parental responsability, the writer presents a short description of the situation. He explains the fact that school spend time and effort to educate childrens but without parents's support, this work is maden in vain.

Then, according to the author the debate about parental responsability must be start.

Next, he proposes a succession of questions to open the thought into different orientations, to find a solution.

As a conclusion, he makes a comparaison between parents and pupils in school and indicates that the most important to give someone the desire to progress, to succeed, is encouragement, respect, whatever the age.

I agree with this conclusion because I think to help parents is better than to blame them, to find a solution.

To my mind, parent's sanctions, television or magazines's messages cannot have influence and on the contrary they can agrave the situation and the feeling of exclusion.

For next week, I'll work on the text n°5 from aix-marseille.

Have a good week.

Bye

I allow myself to corrext some mistakes. I will write my summary for this text, so do not hesitate to do the same . It's easier to correct the other's mistakes

I will have used "make the situation worse" instead of "aggravate"

In the plural, "child" gives "children" . You don't have to add a "s"

You are quite right . it's easier to correct someone else's errors . But it is also a good experience and it helps .

[csand]

Here is my summary for the 4th text.

In this text, entitled « education quandary », a primary headmaster alerts parents about the important role they have to play in the education of their children. He regrets that parents ask too much to schools by fear of not having the better education for their child. School provides good stuff to educate children but education is not limited to the time they spend at school. Parents have to assume their duties and to show to their child that they agree with what is taught at school. A good education requires parents’ committement and involvement.

This issue about parental responsibility has to be raised.

The headmaster questions the role that parents play and the efficiency of the different measures taken to help them. The keys of a good education are that parents prevent children from dangers and that they support them, are interesting in what they are doing. Lots of measures are taken to inform them, to answer their questions at the level of the state, of the school and of the society. But are they efficient and reliable? The author even proposes extreme solutions like the implication of well-known people to make them realize of their responsibilities

The headmaster, who is although a parent, recognizes that, as pupils, parents need support, congratulations and respect rather than accusations and reproaches to succeed in their task.

In France, there’s a big debate about the parents, resigned, who abdicate from their parental duty. They are lacking authority because of difficult situation like single-parent or recomposed families. Sometimes parents are willing to have only fun with their child. They think that they role is to bring up their child and let the education, that means learning to behave oneself and culture to school. These people put all their hope in school to educate their children and they ask it a lot too.

[foufinson]

That's my summary for the 4th text.

This text talks of the education quandary, especially of the parent’s responsibility. The writer of this text says to be sick of all talk of parent power.

We realize that at the beginning of the text, this writer speaks for professors and for their discouragement when they are seen how much time and effort is wasted because pupils aren’t able to take what’s on offer.

Then the writer explains that we must debate of parental responsibility. Parents must back school up, to give at children any hope of making the most of their education. The writer continues to putting questions to the reader to realize that several factors can explain this education quandary : an incoherent national policy toward parents, the scourge of drinks and drugs, message on television or magazines…

At the end, the writer speaks for parents saying “we”. He says that parents aren’t different from pupils in school. They need to of praise, respect of encouragement to try the best they can. I’m agree with this conclusion and I think that education is something so difficult. That’s for this reason that everybody (parents, professors, children, politician…) must work hand in hand.

[teacher]

Here is my summary for the 4th text.

In this text, entitled « education quandary », a primary headmaster alerts parents about the important role they have to play in the education of their children. He regrets that parents ask too much to schools by fear of not having the better education for their child. School provides good stuff to educate children but education is not limited to the time they spend at school. Parents have to assume their duties and to show to their child that they agree with what is taught at school. A good education requires parents’ committement and involvement.

This issue about parental responsibility has to be raised.

The headmaster questions the role that parents play and the efficiency of the different measures taken to help them. The keys of a good education are that parents prevent children from dangers and that they support them, are interesting in what they are doing. Lots of measures are taken to inform them, to answer their questions at the level of the state, of the school and of the society. But are they efficient and reliable? The author even proposes extreme solutions like the implication of well-known people to make them realize of their responsibilities

The headmaster, who is although a parent, recognizes that, as pupils, parents need support, congratulations and respect rather than accusations and reproaches to succeed in their task.

In France, there’s a big debate about the parents, resigned, who abdicate from their parental duty. They are lacking authority because of difficult situation like single-parent or recomposed families. Sometimes parents are willing to have only fun with their child. They think that they role is to bring up their child and let the education, that means learning to behave oneself and culture to school. These people put all their hope in school to educate their children and they ask it a lot too.