Theme "Education"

I've read an article called "Homework: Why Do It". The author of the article is Michael Wilson. The main idea and the author's position is that the homework should be effective. If it's just busy work, it doesn't contribute to the results and knowledges. (You can find the article here: http://www.education.com/reference/article/homework-why-do-it/  )
I absolutely agree with the opinion of Mr. Wilson. Homework is an important part of learning. Lack of homework is a negative influence on the knowledges and skills of students.
When a student does his effective homework, he better studies and understands the information. Certainly , such a result is possible only if the work is able to interest students , to make them get to the point.
 Unfortunately, this position is held not by all teachers. Some of them don't want to develop exercises for their students. It's easy to give students routine work without thinking about it's useless and even negative influence. Such work leads to a lack of interest, boredom and rejection. This is one of the reasons to dislike school or university and the subject. So it is very important to think about homework's effectiveness.
On my own I want to add that this is an indispensable quality of teachers to be sensitive and attentive. Only a true expert can instill a love of learning as in the classroom as at home. Quality developing of the homework is also one of the indicators of an excellent teacher.
What do you think about homework? Is it useful or useless? What kind of effective homework you know?

Mass Media in our life

I’ve read an article called “Mass Media in our life”. This article tells us about influence and importance of mass media in our daily life, about TV, about The Internet and etc.

Mass media can be used for various purposes: advocacy, both for business and social concerns. This can include advertising, marketing, propaganda, public relations, and political communication. Entertainment, traditionally through performances of acting, music, and sports, along with light reading. Since the late 20th century also through video and computer games. Journalism is the discipline of collecting, analyzing, verifying and presenting information regarding current events, trends, issues and people. Those who practice journalism are known as journalists. Electronic media and print media include: Broadcasting, in the narrow sense, for radio and television. Many instances of various types of recorded discs or tapes. In the 20th century, these were mainly used for music. Video and computer uses followed. Film, most often used for entertainment, but also for documentaries.

Most newspapers contain news, detailed articles on home and international affairs, reviews of books, art and TV shows. Many of them also cover sports events. In the USA daily newspapers are published in 34 different languages. The Internet has recently become another important source of information. Its main advantage is that news appears on the screen as soon as things happen in real life and you don't have to wait for news time on TV. TV is one of the best inventions the man ever made. We are really beginning to forget what the world was without TV. Everybody knows what a great force is TV in the world today. We become better informed by watching documentaries, science programs, discussions and political issues of the day. TV gives us opportunities to see the best actors, sport matches, to meet famous people. TV brings the world to our room. TV helps us to relax after a hard days work.

As for me, I completely agree with the author of this article. Nobody in our days can imagine his life without any of these aspects of our life (TV, Internet, newspapers). And do you agree with my opinion? Can you imagine your life without mass media? Are you agree that it’s very important part of our life?

The article on the topic of mass media/language peculiarities

I’ve just read an article on the rt.com. It’s called “China’s no pun zone: Regulator cracks down on internet slang in media” and, as it was published today, it’s very updated and touches burning issues.

The topic of the article is Chinese language in mass media. The author (Carlos Barria) tells us that broadcasters were ordered to conform to regular Chinese language in programs and ads, virtually prohibiting use of wordplay and puns that are borrowed from foreign languages or disfigure Chinese proverbs.

SARFT (or The State Administration of Radio, Film and Television) considers the use of non-standard Chinese language by the media to be “contradictory in spirit to the promotion and continuance of excellent, traditional Chinese culture.” That’s why it’s necessary for radio and TV authorities to take severe measures against inaccurate use of the Chinese language.

A lot of attention was paid to Chinese idioms and proverbs, which are often misused. It’s inadmissible because they contain cultural heritage and great moral and ideological values.

Moreover, author attracts our attention to a large number of homophones in Chinese, due to which the language is very convenient for puns, wordplay, and which lead to quite rude humor.

One of the reasons of such language evolution, in which traditional sayings lose their esteem and many borrowings are introduced, is the Internet. This is especially true for younger generations. A lot of new words were invented by use of borrowings from other languages, especially from English. The author gives us an interesting example of “Chinsumer”. That means “a Chinese person spending a lot of money on luxuries while traveling abroad.” And such words become more and more popular. SARFT wants mass media to avoid this internet slang in order that youth won’t get false ideas about their native language and culture.

However, there are other opinions concerning this topic.  Huang Anjing, executive editor of Yaowen-Jiaozi, is among the people who consider such rules important, but see them as too draconian and overly conservative. He points out that this slang enriched our lives. There are other quotations, showing that language evolution shouldn’t be denied, that new rules are excessively severe.

In the end of the article, the author says about Russian laws concerning language, giving as an example the foolish idea of banning all words of non-Russian origin borrowed since the 1990s from the media. Fortunately, this initiative failed.

Nevertheless, Russia prohibited swearwords from the media in summer this year. The rule affects bloggers as well, since blogs with a number of readers over a certain threshold are considered media outlets.

As for me, I think that language is a part of culture and we must protect it, but the process of its evolution is unavoidable and it is not as harmful as it’s thought to be. Of course, there are good sides. For instance, many borrowed words are very innovative; they embellish our language and not spoil it. They can mean and expess things that have no proper names in our language. Moreover, I think pans and wordplay could be just funny and not offensive. However, the native language shouldn’t be forgotten, we mustn’t replace all words by the new ones.

I believe that we must bring up and educate children in order they don’t neglect their history and culture, but that should be done not by prohibitions but by development and dissemination of classic language.

I offer all of you to read this article. Here’s the link.

What do you think about language evolution? About such prohibitions which are discussed in China? How should we protect our language? I'll be glad to listen to your opinions. 

Mass media

http://www.opinion-maker.org/2011/01/mass-media-and-its-influence-on-society/

We're under Mass media's control

              The mass media has the huge influence on the society. Every day we receive information from the various sources of a broadcasting: newspapers, television, radio, cinema and the Internet. This information has both favorable influence and destroying. On the one hand, the function of the mass media has informative character that promotes expansion of our outlook, also the mass media participates in socialization of society, its role as a link with the outside world is indisputable. But on the other hand, the mass media influences harmful on the weak children's mentality, and society turns into a consumer society.

We trust own intuition, experience and knowledge too little. But we take on trust everything that the media broadcasts to us. The adverts on TV, billboards often define our choice upon purchase of the next goods. Often the advertising convinces that you need something for expression of own identity, as a result there is a "mainstream". The media participates in ours psychological education. Children early get acquainted with the scenes of violence and erotic character, certainly leaving a trail in the still weak minds. The mass media forms our ideals, values and mass opinion.

It seems to me that in the near future the complete control over thinking, described in George Orwell's novel "1984", is possible. The informative globalization is unavoidable. 

Do you share my point of view? Could you give some examples of the media's influence according to your own experience?

Text neck: how smartphones are damaging our spines

 http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2014/nov/24/text-neck-how-smartphones-damaging-our-spines
I've just read an article called "Text neck: how smartphones are damaging our spines". This article was published in The Guardian. It was written by Homa Khaleeli. I think this article is very actual for us, because everyone has a smartphone and spends too much time with it.
The author of the article gives us the results of the new research carried out by a US doctor. He says that its really hard for our neck always look down on the phone and it can lead to damage. It can cause head pain or neck pain. Also Homa Khaleeli gives us a graphic. It shows us how to keep the head right and wrong. The best way is to look forward, not drop your chin on to your chest. We can see some pieces of advice from Sammy Margo from the UK’s Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. She advices people to call each other but not to write so many messages. In the end of the article the author says "It is not the first time we have been warned about the dangers of texting". And I do agree with this statement. Texting damages our eyes too.
But today we can't imagine our life without smartphone and people will use it anyway. We don't afraid of this harm until we get it. I think it's almost normal to have a health problems when you are 45, but when children have all this deseases from their smartfpones it's awfull. They get tired of looking down in a copybook or in a book, but then they look in their phones and tired more. So, I think, parents shouldn't buy smartphones to their little children.

As for adults,  they should decide for themselves - to stop text messages or not. I won't. It's very useful and fast. Also, the spine of grown-up people is not so weak. Nothing wrong in itself with bending forward to use a smartphone, laptop, tablet or read a book. The problem comes in because so many people, especially young ones, aren't doing anything much else, for at least several hours a day. 

So, how many hours a day do you use your smartphone? Does it hurt you? Will you stop texting because of this researces?

The article on the topic of foreign policy

The article on the topic of foreign policy

http://rt.com/politics/208615-foreigners-biometric-fingerprinting-russian/
http://rt.com/politics/russia-hiv-aids-fingerprinting-828/

I've read an article called "Putin orders fingerprinting of all foreigners arriving in Russia". It was published on the RT.COM on November 25. It was written by Igor Zarembo. The author draws us a real picture of tense situation in Russia.

The main purpose of this article is to show us a variant of fighting illegal immigration and terrorism. He tells us about biometric registration using fingerprinting of all foreign citizens and persons without citizenship who receive entry visas. This new order was signed by President Putin. This law will enter into force on December 10 but Russian diplomats are instructed to inform foreign countries about the new rules before December 5. Igor explains us the benefits of the given law. First of all, it helps our Interior Ministry in identifying people and fighting with crime. Another benefit is banning people who use new fake documents. Also fingerprinting will reflect the information about people with dangerous diseases and the creation of a national database. Such system of fingerprinting should be set up on all borders of Russia but the author informs us that it is very expensive for our country.

In my opinion, our country needs such system of identifying people. I have some reasons FOR this system. First of all, Russia is the biggest country in the world, as we know, so it is very hard to control all its regions and parts, so fingerprinting helps the officers and the President to govern the country better. Secondly, the level of crime, migrants and terrorism grows every year unfortunately. I’m sure this system helps to increase the security of our country. Moreover, there are a lot of people with dangerous and fatal diseases all over the world. Every year scientists fight with new outbreaks of deadly and viral diseases which are transmitted in different ways and infect people. So this system is necessary for our country because it protects the health of Russian people. But of course every system has its own disadvantages. The human rights defenders will say that it is an invasion of privacy and offence against the law. Also the whole project promised to be very expensive and hardly justifiable from an economic point of view. And from my point of view I think that other countries will rebel and it will undermine our political system.

Finally, I want to ask my groupmates, do you think is it a good idea to create such system in our country? Is it really necessary for Russia? Will it really protect us from the deadly diseases and terrorism?

The article on the topic of social behaviour/art

Hello, my suscribers!

I've just read an article on the website of a TV channel "France 24". The article is called "'Human Zoo' exhibition comes to Paris amid racism row". 
It was written by Tony Todd and Charlotte Boitiaux.
The article really impressed me. I have, I'd say,a double-feeling, if I can say that. So, let me tell you about this "Human Zoo".
First of all, I must admit that this "Exhibition B" was forbidden in London. This is a kind of an art show which shows us black actors in cages. Slavery times. The director of this exhibition is Brett Bailey from South Africa.
The authors tell us that this perfomance is supposed to be a thought-provoking look at the 19th-and 20th-century practice of exhibiting people from the colonies in human zoos for public amusement (you can see some pictures).
Of course, there are two points of view on this situation. Some people are for, others - against.
It's necessary to underline, that the exhibition is going to take place in two districts where a big part of non-white population lives: at the Theatre Gerard Philipe at Saint Denis, and the Centquatre cultural centre in northern Paris. Bailey insists "Exhibit B" aims to improve awareness of the racism of Europe's colonial past.

Protest against Exhibit B at the Barbican, Waterloo station

Of course, as the authors emphasise, not everyone agrees with the idea. There are some opinions in the article from the comments on website change.org.
People deny this exhibition saying that it's a kind of racism, it's a horror show which is like an insult to the people living in such conditions where they are forced to confront and understand racism on a daily basis.

The "Exhibit B" was shown in France, 2013, without any controversy. But it faced a storm of protest and 25.000 people have already sined the petition agains it. The authors quote the lecturer Dr Kehinde Andrews who called "Exhibit B" an example of art that crosses the line into racial exploitation and abuse.
Also, he said: "If you pay to see it you are colluding in the worst kind of racial abuse; that which is done in the pretence (or worse, the belief) that it is progressive."

Do you agree with his statement? I don't know. It's hard to say - is it a good idea of "Human Zoo" or not.
I think that this is a kind of modern art. It's a bit something extraordinary and truthful. The exhibition tells people and all super-extra-tolerant Europe about the past which nobody should forget. Even its some disgraceful moments. And I do understand the black population, 'cause they are against it - they don't want to see what their ancestors felt centuries ago.

Look attentively at the pictures connected with the exhibition. What can you say about it? Is it a good idea? Would you like to be in actors' shoes? To show the past and all the shame moments when African people were to exhibit themselves?
Besides, this perfomance has been in Moscow recently. Would you go there? Or you support the point of view which was pointed by Dr Kehinde Andrews? I'll be very glad to hear and see your opinions.

If you hold an interest in this article then I put the link here http://www.france24.com/en/20141119-human-zoo-exhibition-comes-paris-amid-racism-row-france-art/