Thanks to oblivion, How is my english?

I have maked my introduction as yours , I hope that it's not a problem for you, I prefere tell you about that.

Could you , Oblivion or teacher, tell me , how is my english because I think that I have got a lot of difficulties, and I suppose that, I won't pass this discipline. Thanks

So, this is my summary:

On the Thursday, may thirty-first, Yahoo news site published an article dealing with a social problem: weapons at school, and entitled: “ teachers get power to search pupils for knives”.

I can be divided my report in two parts: firsly, I ‘m going to make a summary of this text, secondly, I will explain my opinion about violence at school.

For the beginning, the journalist explains that the government authorizes headteachers to search children who have got weapons at school.

They will use detector of metal, and camera for stopping this violence. In this article, Johnson Alan, who is education secretary precises that schools have got the law with their, and if there is a risk, they could call the police.

The journalists addicts that in 1995, a headteacher was stabbing (poignardé) by a pupil when he has wanted to save a student.

So, pupil will be screen and children who don’t want be screening, they won’t enter at school.

Johnson precises that parents will be agree with this decision because it’s for the safety of their children at school.

A lot of authorities and associations are agree with this law too, because, as tells David Tuck, who is a national president of the National Association of Head Teachers, children go to school “to learn and not to fight!”

In my mind, television, and playstations are very dangerous for children if parents don’t supervise what they watched. Indeed, there are a lot of violence and they can kill police or people easily in plays (games ?). So, parents don’t (should not ?) accept that their children play to it.

According to me, children who play with arms don’t make a difference between reality and fiction, they identified to their heros, but it’s very dangerous. I want me where are their parents during this time. I don’t pretend that it’s only parents’ mistake but if their children are in danger, they must make something: to ask with their and to see a psychologist if it’s more serious, for example.

School,Associations could help their if they want...

But I understand how it must paintful to see his child to become violent. Meanwhile, parents must protect their children, if they don’t make it, they can be punishable by law.

I want to addict that I have two children , and if I know that weapons are in school, I will be affraid, and I will agree with this law, unless they will go (partiraient) to this school!

At the conclusion, the measures are excessive and schools are like to prisons, but , in this countries , the violence is terrible and if it’s can help children to learn without risking to be kill, I think it’s a good solution.

But, in my mind, it’s a consequence of “open ‘schools.”

Hello,

I am not a specialist, I read your text and underlined mistakes I saw.

Emma

This is my summary about "'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders "

Thanks Emma

On Wednesday the four april 2007, BBC news published an article dealing with the towns surveillance. This text is entitled “'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders “.

My report can be divided in two parts: firstly, I’m going to make a summary, secondly, I will explain my opinion about this measures of safety in the town.

Firsly, the journalist explains that people will be supervised by camera in the street and this measures will be extended in certains english towns. He precises that loudspeakers could talking to people and could tell their to stop if they have made an offence. This article emphazes (souligne) the fact that the government spent a lot of money for buying this cameras.

John Reid, who is Home Secretary, explain that filming people in the street it’s an offence who can be punished by law. This article compares differents point of view about this subject. Someone are agree with this law because they prefere being supervised in case of would be attaked , other are disagree with it because they think that they don’t free anymore. Moreover, the government has realized a research about this plan of actions, and has conclued that britain “has becoming a surveillance society”, and has used too watchdogs for the supervision.

So, being supervised by cameras in the street for avoiding to be attaked, is a good or a bad solution?

In my mind, the telesurveillance in towns, is very frigthening. I won’t like to be supervised in the street even if I risked to be attaked. I find that if people was more stand together (solidaires), cameras will be needless (inutile). But, when women are attaked in train or in bus, without someone protect her, I think that there is a real problem. I suppose they are affraid by the violence, but they are more numerous. Where are heros as James Bond? Or Rocky who don’t be affraid....

According to me, the government would must to pay training period (stages) of karate for all the people. They could protect theim without being filmed and perhaps, the government would spend less.

To conclude, we can say that the government has tried to find a solution for avoiding (éviter) violence, but in my mind, it’s not a best solution.

This is my summary about "'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders "

Thanks Emma

On Wednesday the four april 2007, BBC news published an article dealing with the towns surveillance. This text is entitled “'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders “.

My report can be divided in two parts: firstly, I’m going to make a summary, secondly, I will explain my opinion about this measures of safety in the town.

Firsly, the journalist explains that people will be supervised by camera in the street and this measures will be extended in certains english towns. He precises that loudspeakers could talking to people and could tell their to stop if they have made an offence. This article emphazes (souligne) the fact that the government spent a lot of money for buying this cameras.

John Reid, who is Home Secretary, explain that filming people in the street it’s an offence who can be punished by law. This article compares differents point of view about this subject. Someone are agree with this law because they prefere being supervised in case of would be attaked , other are disagree with it because they think that they don’t free anymore. Moreover, the government has realized a research about this plan of actions, and has conclued that britain “has becoming a surveillance society”, and has used too watchdogs for the supervision.

So, being supervised by cameras in the street for avoiding to be attaked, is a good or a bad solution?

In my mind, the telesurveillance in towns, is very frigthening. I won’t like to be supervised in the street even if I risked to be attaked. I find that if people was more stand together (solidaires), cameras will be needless (inutile). But, when women are attaked in train or in bus, without someone protect her, I think that there is a real problem. I suppose they are affraid by the violence, but they are more numerous. Where are heros as James Bond? Or Rocky who don’t be affraid....

According to me, the government would must to pay training period (stages) of karate for all the people. They could protect theim without being filmed and perhaps, the government would spend less.

To conclude, we can say that the government has tried to find a solution for avoiding (éviter) violence, but in my mind, it’s not a best solution.

Be careful to this current mistake

to agree and to disagree (and not to be agree or to be disagree)

Emma

Thanks to oblivion, How is my english?

I have maked my introduction as yours , I hope that it's not a problem for you, I prefere tell you about that.

Could you , Oblivion or teacher, tell me , how is my english because I think that I have got a lot of difficulties, and I suppose that, I won't pass this discipline. Thanks

So, this is my summary:

On the Thursday, may thirty-first, Yahoo news site published an article dealing with a social problem: weapons at school, and entitled: “ teachers get power to search pupils for knives”.

I can be divided my report in two parts: firsly, I ‘m going to make a summary of this text, secondly, I will explain my opinion about violence at school.

For the beginning, the journalist explains that the government authorizes headteachers to search children who have got weapons at school.

They will use detector of metal, and camera for stopping this violence. In this article, Johnson Alan, who is education secretary precises that schools have got the law with their, and if there is a risk, they could call the police.

The journalists addicts that in 1995, a headteacher was stabbing (poignardé) by a pupil when he has wanted to save a student.

So, pupil will be screen and children who don’t want be screening, they won’t enter at school.

Johnson precises that parents will be agree with this decision because it’s for the safety of their children at school.

A lot of authorities and associations are agree with this law too, because, as tells David Tuck, who is a national president of the National Association of Head Teachers, children go to school “to learn and not to fight!”

In my mind, television, and playstations are very dangerous for children if parents don’t supervise what they watched. Indeed, there are a lot of violence and they can kill police or people easily in plays (games ?). So, parents don’t (should not ?) accept that their children play to it.

According to me, children who play with arms don’t make a difference between reality and fiction, they identified to their heros, but it’s very dangerous. I want me where are their parents during this time. I don’t pretend that it’s only parents’ mistake but if their children are in danger, they must make something: to ask with their and to see a psychologist if it’s more serious, for example.

School,Associations could help their if they want...

But I understand how it must paintful to see his child to become violent. Meanwhile, parents must protect their children, if they don’t make it, they can be punishable by law.

I want to addict that I have two children , and if I know that weapons are in school, I will be affraid, and I will agree with this law, unless they will go (partiraient) to this school!

At the conclusion, the measures are excessive and schools are like to prisons, but , in this countries , the violence is terrible and if it’s can help children to learn without risking to be kill, I think it’s a good solution.

But, in my mind, it’s a consequence of “open ‘schools.”

This is my summary about "'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders "

Thanks Emma

On Wednesday the four april 2007, BBC news published an article dealing with the towns surveillance. This text is entitled “'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders “.

My report can be divided in two parts: firstly, I’m going to make a summary, secondly, I will explain my opinion about this measures of safety in the town.

Firsly, the journalist explains that people will be supervised by camera in the street and this measures will be extended in certains english towns. He precises that loudspeakers could talking to people and could tell their to stop if they have made an offence. This article emphazes (souligne) the fact that the government spent a lot of money for buying this cameras.

John Reid, who is Home Secretary, explain that filming people in the street it’s an offence who can be punished by law. This article compares differents point of view about this subject. Someone are agree with this law because they prefere being supervised in case of would be attaked , other are disagree with it because they think that they don’t free anymore. Moreover, the government has realized a research about this plan of actions, and has conclued that britain “has becoming a surveillance society”, and has used too watchdogs for the supervision.

So, being supervised by cameras in the street for avoiding to be attaked, is a good or a bad solution?

In my mind, the telesurveillance in towns, is very frigthening. I won’t like to be supervised in the street even if I risked to be attaked. I find that if people was more stand together (solidaires), cameras will be needless (inutile). But, when women are attaked in train or in bus, without someone protect her, I think that there is a real problem. I suppose they are affraid by the violence, but they are more numerous. Where are heros as James Bond? Or Rocky who don’t be affraid....

According to me, the government would must to pay training period (stages) of karate for all the people. They could protect theim without being filmed and perhaps, the government would spend less.

To conclude, we can say that the government has tried to find a solution for avoiding (éviter) violence, but in my mind, it’s not a best solution.

- le but s'exprime avec " to + base verbale"

ex : find a solutionTO AVOID...

- TO my mind

- révise ' them' ' their'...

- attention : pas de "s" aux adjectifs ( different points of view)

Oblivion,

I have just noticed your dates ... OOOOps ! Too late to wish good luck for your English !

I am pretty sure you had no problem with your English oral exam !

All the best for the rest ...

Let me know your results !

Thanks teacher I'm back from my oral exam. I had to work on a text about cats and dogs killed for their fur. It's a pity I hadn't studied that theme this year because maybe I would have found more things to say in my commentary . I was so stressed while speaking that even the jury noticed it I feel relieved that it went well anyway

One last exam to go as far as I'm concerned and then we'll have to wait for the results

Good luck to the other candidates

I invite you to join me on msn messenger or skype to talk about the main themes that we have to revise for the english exam.

This is my address:

sophilouise@hotmail.com

See you soon

Thanks teacher I'm back from my oral exam. I had to work on a text about cats and dogs killed for their fur. It's a pity I hadn't studied that theme this year because maybe I would have found more things to say in my commentary . I was so stressed while speaking that even the jury noticed it I feel relieved that it went well anyway

One last exam to go as far as I'm concerned and then we'll have to wait for the results

Good luck to the other candidates

Hello Oblivion... could I just ask you one question? Could you tell me what was the newspaper your article was extracted from? And as the article can be on any daily subjets, we cannot study each of them. GOOD LUCK for the rest!

Hello Oblivion... could I just ask you one question? Could you tell me what was the newspaper your article was extracted from? And as the article can be on any daily subjets, we cannot study each of them. GOOD LUCK for the rest!

Hi florenceloq

In fact it was not extracted from any newspaper but from the internet website of an organization for the protection of animals. I'm afraid I can't remember the name of it Good luck to you too for your oral exams

Oblivion,

have you got your results yet ?

I hope you made it !

Please let me know

All the best to you and all your hard-working pals

Thank you teacher We're still waiting for the results to be published, hopefully tomorrow afternoon I'm really starting to get nervous