Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 20 2003, 10:52 PM

I suppose that the subject with most variable ways of teaching is History. At first it seems that where facts lead, there should not be a place for arguments, but as long as the motion of history doesn't ever stop and positions from which each country looks at it, are very different, arguments always arise. Thus, it cold be very useful to unite the teaching of history at least in EU.
In addition, the idea of Curriculum can be developed. May be there could be an organisation, uniting students and teachers in a kind of a League, organising different events, providing students with help, exchanging experiences...Yet, it is a very good way of communicating with each other. 

Posted by: IST_Oliver_P Mar 21 2003, 10:47 AM

everybody should have a more personalized curriculum that fits to their needs. the teachers should teach each student as an individual and although i do see how this would be very hard and almost impossible it would be great if it could be achieved. 

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 02:08 PM

I hope that Olivier understands our opinion about it and sees the faculties it has to learn what other people are learning and mostly being in a social group of pupils of your age learning the same things you are. Can you imagine how boring it would be to work alone with a personal teacher to teach you??? It would drive me mad!! 

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 22 2003, 09:53 AM

I think there have been some very good points raised in this topic. Personally, I think home schooling is a great idea, as long as the pupil is happy to go through it. The person would have to learn social skills at some point, but he/she could do that by joining a club sometime. I thin that you could get a lot more out of individual tutoring than in groups. For example, at the moment, in my science lessons, I find that am knowing, and understanding a lot more around me than most of the other people in my class, and I feel that if I perhaps had an individual tutor, I could go at my own pace, instead of the speed of the collective class. I'm not saying that I want this to happen, as I love my school, and I thin it's really good, but maybe if it was grouped into sets that were specially designed for people with higher abilities than others. But this is kind of going off the subject.
Back to what Matthew said earlier, the education systems in Europe produce famous and intelligent people. Where would we be without things like pasteurized milk? Or the fridge/freezer? I think at the school I'm in atn the moment, school history is taught a bit different. For example, in my old school in England, I learnt about the Tudors, but this school hasn't done very much about that, because it's an international school, and it needs to take that into perspective.
Just a few more of my weird thoughts. 

Posted by: IST_Oliver_P Mar 22 2003, 07:49 PM

okay what i was trying to say is that some people have a different way of learning than other's. and the idea of home school severely scares me. say if a person has problem's with tests for instance let's say they just tense up and can't remember the answer's but they know them all. what im saying is that even though the igcse's that we take are a lot more individual than some other's some people my not pass them not because they don't study but because they are simply not good at tests. 

Posted by: IST_Emily_B Mar 23 2003, 02:01 PM

I am not saying that this would be right, but what about in the future when/if I.T. is used more frequently, then maybe everyone would stay at home and go to "computer schooling" where one might interact, whilst learning and everthing is done on a computer? What does everyone think about seeing people through a camera on a computer i.e. your teacher but never having to leave home? 

I don't think we will see this happening in our life time as many computers aren't at that stage as yet. Although I was watching a program a while back about this boy who couldn't leave his home for some medical reason (I think he had really bad allergic reactions or a bad immune system), he had a camera on his computer so that he could see everyone in his classroom and do whatever they were doing, although the teacher had to check up on him cause he kept eating! I though this was a really good idea for him because otherwise he would have to get a tutor which would mean no social interaction and certainly not the same equipment i.e. like in labs (this would be more relevant to when he grew up).

In complete contrary to that, I don't think that this is ideal for all children, I feel that you do need social interactions and all that goes with it.....what do you guys think about what might happen to education in the future? 

Posted by: IST_Grace_B Mar 23 2003, 04:21 PM

A European curriculum? i just don't think it would work. Many different cultures would be shunned i think at the expense of a biased system. bringing this up again, as Matthew A said. Can u imagine studying the rise of Hitler in a European curriculum? it would take the fun out of the whole thing. Everyone would end up with a very neutral dead opinion on a topic which is one of the most important in European history. But what makes it so important and interesting is different cultures' perspectives of it. having a European curriculum would mean that everyone would b taught the same views and opinions. I think it would b horrible, bland and boring. i certainly hope i'm not still in schooling if such a mad thing ever does come about 

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 23 2003, 08:27 PM

I think that the best of solving the problem about computers is to unite all the thoughts above.
When we divide schools from computers we are cutting them from the world and new information. I came from the school where computers were not used until year 9 and I suppose this is a disadvantage of my previous school. school should give possibility of communicating with world.
On the other hand teaching only by computer is seems like communicating with a fridge. Yes, we are modern civilisation, but I'm afraid with this perspective we will lose physical contact with each other.
So isn't it better to provide schools with computers, to teach using them, but to do it in a group, in a class?

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 25 2003, 10:30 PM

rachelle's point that in the states there is about the same curriculum, but in each state it is mandatory to study one or two years of the state in which you live in history. i think that a similar idea, but on a larger scale, could work in Europe. with a rough standard for what should be taught in classes that are similar in every country i should think, such as maths, sciences, and others. but English history, for example, should not be taught in Greece. i think that a good balance between a European standard and each countries'. classes also depend on the availability of materials and teachers, and some countries may not be able to afford as good materials, resources, and teachers as other, better off countries. 

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 27 2003, 07:04 PM

I agree with Charlotte, and Amelia, but on different things. Firstly, I think it is great to learn about other countries' history than your own. I love learning about Chinese history, even though it probably will have no effect on my life, I still like to know about it. Things that the English school learn about like the Greeks, Romans, or French Revolution, these are taught as they have given a great contribution t Europe/the world. You don't learn about some Chinese guy who founded gunpowder, or you don't learn about the American who invented the light bulb, even though these may be just as important as the other stuff you learn in English schools. Although I think you should learn different types of History, I agree with Charlotte in that you should learn about history in your own country. It is a part of your culture, and shouldn't be forgotten, or left in some book that wont be opened for the next few thousand years.
Wow, a history debate, Mr. Jones-Nerzic will be pleased 

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 28 2003, 09:28 AM

I think history is a bit like languages - even if you never need to use it, its still cool to know and helps you understand other cultures and became more 'international'.
I didn't know the Chinese invented gunpowder... but its an interesting fact! Of course, I think we have to take in mind the amount of time available to actually learn things - its impossible to teach all the history of the world, so people just get taught the history that will let them pass the exams. In reality, its not the history teachers that need to change...but the exams we take? 

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 28 2003, 09:51 AM

i agree with Mimi, we are not learning as much as learning to pass out exams. in Texas, there was the TAAS test which standard was lowered every year so that the school and state would look good. we weren't learning history, grammar, Maths, and science, but how to pass those exams. i think that all the pressure and emphasis on exams has negative effects and people don't learn as much. this, i suppose, depends on the person, but overall i think we don't so much as learn, but memorize. 

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 28 2003, 10:32 PM

I'm waiting this time when we will study about Russia, Mr. Jones. I just really would like to know if it will differ from what I've studied in Russia. Probably it can, as many foreigners imagine that in Russia it is always -25 degrees, white bears, communists demonstrations and poor workers at factories.
That is one of the reasons to make single curriculum, because may be it will prevent arguments about what event has actually happened, etc... ?
That's true it can cause big arguments, but if it can be organised now and a special committee from the whole Europe will register united view of the event that is happening now, that can be useful for future generations.

Posted by: Mr. Field Mar 21 2003, 02:37 PM

I think Ricky was being somewhat sarcastic in his comments - whilst interesting, this topic was one we created to get people started. Let's try to move onto other topics with your great ideas. (Leaving Denmark bashing and war mongering aside) 

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 03:10 PM

Well we are in an International forum and that kind of sarcasm might be understood by English but maybe not the other people ( like me). That's something we learn in our school. I can make Spanish sarcasm too if any wants some! 

Posted by: IST_Grace_B Mar 23 2003, 10:50 PM

aaaah the Eurovision song contest...a show loved n adored by fossils all over Europe. It's harmless! what wrong does it do? Why abolish it??
yeh i admit, it is pretty pants nowadays, and i never watch it anymore, but when i was younger i enjoyed it!! If it's not your cup of tea then don't watch it, no one is forcing you to! And who on earth linked the Eurovision song contest to war eh?? just run yer reasons by me again whoever that was... 
i wouldn't exactly call it social gathering of the year but i really do not see any harm in it at all. Plus it gives us a very interesting insight to Estonian and Latvian pop music... quality.... 

Posted by: IST_Hannah_T Mar 28 2003, 12:34 PM

Does anyone else think that the Eurovision song contest is absolutely rubbish! It is the cheesiest thing ever!!! Loads of the teeny countries sing in English, and have really bad accents...why on earth don't they sing in their own language...? this is their chance to shine, and they do it in English? I don't think that is right...
I think that Eurovision is basically a bad awards show! They always have all these stupid little documentary things from the host country that go for hours, and always have these celebrities who no one has ever heard of, speaking in absolutely STUPID rhyme in French and English, and no-one cares!!! And the people that announce the votes at the end are all really stupid, with their shiny polished teeth and their plastic hair!! It's sooo annoying! although i suppose it is a good way for these countries to have their little 15 minutes of fame....and for all the transvestites in the world to make people laugh...but sometimes people that started on Eurovision become famous later: Abba, Celine Dion...etc
So i dunno.....I will probably watch Eurovision..to laugh, to cry, to cringe , to occupy a boring night ....but you can be sure Ill be sitting on the sofa, screaming softly at every entrant, and cheering in vain for Britain to get more points that Estonia.
And going with Graeme's example: Peace 
Luv yall
Hannah xXx 

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 28 2003, 09:33 PM

I don't really understand why everybody is soooo mad about Eurovision? Does it do any harm? There are loads of people in this world who like pop music and nobody can condemn them for their taste! if you like another type of music, just watch another types of shows!
An what about language>

First of all its a rule of Eurovision that everybody should sing in English, so everybody is able not only hear the music but to understand the lyrics too. Second, I don't think anybody can blame singers for their accent! I don't want to offend you, Hannah but if you will need to sing for example in Chinese or any other language, that is not your native one, you will probably have an accent too.
I don't want to say that I'm fierce fan of Eurovision or that it really unites all countries, but I still think that there should be wide range of TV shows for different tastes and no one can say that they are rubbish just because HE or SHE PERSONALLY doesn't like them! 

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 20 2003, 01:52 PM

I think that it's a great idea. I don't see why so many stick their noses up at the idea. There could be many reasons to come into the country, from work opportunities, to persecution. But either way, it could be good to learn these peoples views on their own country. I have no objection for people immigrating. It's just like an extended holiday, and they don't ban that many people for going on holiday. 

Posted by: NW_Richard_F Mar 20 2003, 05:49 PM

I like these comments are they are positive. So much is said about immigration about how bad it is, all the trouble it causes. I admit there are lots of people here who strongly believe that immigration is a huge issue and are very worried about it. We should welcome people into the country as everyone has something to give. 

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 10:44 AM

I think that there might be a problem with the illegal immigrants but not because they could be criminals or something but because we wouldn't have enough food or houses to give them immediately and they would have to wait. Thousands of illegal immigrants die every week in the Spanish seas because they try to get to the Spanish coasts in tiny, insecure dirty boats that are soon drowned. It's horrible what those people do to try to escape from the poverty they live in. I seriously think there should be new laws that would make getting visas much easier for the ones that don't have the same luck as us.

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 21 2003, 01:37 PM

I think that it's great to be at the school I'm in at the moment. You have so many cultures that blend in to each other so easily here. I know that if we had so many Scottish, American, and Spanish people in my old school in England, they would have been made fun of a lot.
But in this school, everybody has something to contribute, mainly because of the cultures that they have come from. It's amazing that when I first came here, all the accents stuck out so much, even from other parts of England. But now they've kinda blended into the background, and I couldn't say if anyone asked me that they were really that defend from myself.
I think immigration is a great idea, especially in the situation that I'm in now.

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 21 2003, 09:20 PM

Helena, there is a vast difference between refugee immigrants, people who come to our countries without professions. people from America come to France either on tourist holidays or to live. the come here with professions, they are not refugees. i agree refugees need a home. why not build some refugee shelters in each country? Seems a good idea to me! its better than them living in poverty and disease!

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 22 2003, 05:28 PM

Right, Sam, lets just think for a minute about all the things that immigrants bring to Britain. you say that loads of English people feel the same as you, would they feel the same, however, if it was English people having to do the dirty, low paid job that immigrants take? How about the large number of skilled workers coming from abroad? the NHS ha loads of Pakistani doctors working for tem, and these doctors help sick English people like maybe you. By the way, I do know what's happening in Iraq and I know who saddam hussain is. Helena is completely right when she points out that America has not done a particularly good job in removing all the nasty dictators in our world, has it? After all, who put the Taliban in place? The Americans.
Helena: "Ni saddam, ni uncle sam!"

Posted by: IST_Rachelle_W Mar 24 2003, 07:48 PM

I don't think that whether or not immigrants help or hinder a country makes a difference. I think that we (as well off countries) have the responsibility to help them. We have plenty of money, we have plenty of space, we waste things, so who is to say that we can't share just a little portion of what we have with people who have lost their families, who are starving, and who are dying.
You could say in return that we are doing are share buy donating money and aid to these countries in need, but it isn't helping enough, it isn't accomplishing what needs to be done, so we can't stop there.

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 25 2003, 09:38 AM

After reading different opinions i now realise that immigrants make our countries more interesting. Like Restaurants and things like that. Different celebrations and stuff. But the conditions in which they live in are awful! The governments should help as these people have fled their homes because of war and things. When they reach our countries they get nothing better.

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 26 2003, 03:07 PM

More than special aids, I think they need support from everyone and open people around them. They have enough problems, they don't need racism too. I agree with Charlotte, everyone should be ok with them because they are people like you and me running away from poverty. Yesterday, in the Spanish news, 100 of Romanians were found hiding in a Spanish factory. They were illegal immigrants obviously, and to hide from the police they were closed up into a tiny space, a metre wide and 2 metre high. IT was between two walls and was 10 metres long. They were on top of each other and got caught. They were all crying as, this meant that they had no papers and had to come back to Romania.

If papers were easier to get, immigration would be much easier, but then again, it could increase unemployment in some countries and complete misery in the ones the people run off from. Do you think that visas should be easier to get?

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 26 2003, 03:30 PM

I think the world needs to adopt a far more lenient and accepting view of immigrants (especially illegal ones). People who are so so desperate to get into a new country, to a better life that they crowd into tiny cars, die on horrible ships, suffer amazing stigma and prejudice etc. must have come from an awful awful life back home. People often don't realise that these people are fleeing their homes, family, background, roots,; history, and suffering huge dangers to try and get this new life, to give their children opportunities they could never have back where they used to live. Often people are fleeing the danger of death or persecution back home. Then, when they get to this new country, they are often refused papers, and people constantly resent them for 'taking their jobs' or 'sitting down and doing nothing but raking in all the dole money which we pay for with our taxes.' Two very conflicting views, don't you think?
There is so much space in places like France, Spain and even England. Its really sad that our modern world has created such a load of isolationist countries. I agree that a country has to have respect for its culture and stuff, but at what cost? We have created a world where people from poor countries are constantly knocking on the doors of the richer ones. Life shouldn't be like that, we should all be equal, or at least have equal opportunities. I don't know who said it, but on this forum someone was saying how we are all human beings, its time people stopped looking at people and judging them on their skin colour, background, race or circumstances and start looking at the people themselves.
Sorry about this kind of long rant, but it's something I feel really strongly about. Thankyou for reading!

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 26 2003, 10:25 PM

immigration is a topic with lots of issues within it, and like Mimi i feel strongly about it too (hehe). immigration, like so many things in our world today, has become a business where a number of people take advantage of other countries asylum policies. although many immigrants make their way on their on, and on arriving at their destination work and learn the language of their new home. i think that there needs to be a control on immigration, like a quota like there is in Australia. also, a screening of the immigrants if it is possible; this is to keep out criminals and terrorists and i'm not being paranoid, but have my reasons. in Norway, they found that one Kurd who is living in Norway under asylum, is actually one of the leaders of the Kurdistan movement and has been, and still is, sending Norwegian taxpayers' money to buy weapons. is this fair to the working Norwegians?? in Norway, asylum seekers get free housing (and in good areas), a good living allowance to buy clothes, shoes, food, etc. they get paid even more to attend Norwegian classes. also, every family gets child support for each child until they are 18. this is great for them, but what about the people who have to work to support them??
also, the fact that many immigrants are actively involved in drug trafficking and other crimes hasn't helped their image.
i don't think that this is right, not for the Norwegians. immigration has positive effects, but it should be controlled and screened.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 27 2003, 05:19 PM

Ok...where do I start?
But seriously, I think that some things (some!) just don't fit in Charlie's reply. Like, why would a government, especially in Norway, where immigration is seen as such a 'problem' give so much money towards housing and education? If they really are, this surely suggests they need the influx of workers and are therefore willing to support them if they are repaid by a better economy. So ONE Kurd living in Norway was found to be a supporter of a certain movement. what evidence was there to show that the money he was sending was Norwegian workers? was he unemployed and on the equivalent of the Norwegian dole? If so, I'm sure he wouldn't have had that much money to buy any serious weapons. The dole in any country is seriously low, in England its about 40 pounds a week (about 70 euros) which isn't enough to support yourself and weapons of mass destruction.
How many immigrants are involved in drug trafficking and other crimes? Who would they be if they have all these nice living conditions and so much money? Whole groups of people don't rob and get into drugs for fun, they do it because they're desperate, and if they're desperate, it suggests their living standards are less than desirable.
How do you suggest immigrants get screened? It's not like everyone in Kurdistan has a personal file that Norwegian officials can just scroll through, screening would mean holdups of months, if not years for many innocent asylum seekers.
Norway seems to me to be a reasonably big country, with quite a small population.( 4,481,162, July 2000 est. ) Surely this means there is plenty of space for people desperate to work?
Sorry about this little burst again, but I had to say something!

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 27 2003, 06:44 PM

Why should any immigrants be illegal? Why should hey have to hide from authorities in places hardly big enough for them to breath? Why can't us economically developed country just open our gates and welcome in our neighbours? Why does anyone have to have immigration papers? You want to screen people who come into the country, that's fine, it's not going to do any harm, and it'll be about as tight as the security in an airport.
But what about the prejudice that immigrants face every day? Some religious groups, or ethnical groups stay in the same community, and don't go outside of the small world that they're living in to socialize with the other inhabitants of that country. That's because they're scared of what people will do to them, and I don't blame them at all. The problem is that in groups like these, they make a bigger target for racist groups. This is really unfortunate. I used to love going down to the local 'African' part of town. I loved taking yam and taking the ingredients home to make food food. I see no problem with people taking a part of their country, and I think it should be encouraged. It lets people who may not have the resources, or maybe people who just don't want to go to other countries and don't experience cultural enlightenment that isn't hard to come across in that place, but may be very hard, maybe even rare to get in European countries. I used to love waiting for my Grandfather to come over from Ghana and bringing fresh sugar cane. A 2 metre tall cane would only cost about 17 pence there, where as in England, even when you do come across it, it costs £1 for a piece only 10 cm long.
I've just realised how off topic I've gone. I apologise for any inconvenience caused, and if this post has gone on a bit. I'll try to do better next time.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 28 2003, 09:04 AM

Go Henry! I think its really cool that there's such a diversity of cultures in England, but really sad that people feel so threatened by racists. People accuse immigrants of shutting themselves up and not opening up to new cultures - but look at us here in school, an English school, really quite shut off from the French. Besides, you can't blame people, like Henry said, to not want to venture out to the rest of England if they're all going to be persecuted!
In the future I really want to live in different countries all over the world and travel loads, I really hope I wont have to hide away in a little 'English' area of a city when I go, but will be able to travel without being treated in a rascist way. Of course, many racist people don't think about the fact that the rest of the world sees them as foreigners and therefore a target for their own racism.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 28 2003, 12:30 PM

that's the thing, there are multimillionaires and -billionaires who spend their time zipping from place to place in private jets and yachts, while other have to sell their organs or children to eat. this is inhumane, unfair, and just outright horrible. but like Mimi said, we are being pretty hypocritical because we aren't doing much. sure i will give my change to charities, but that's not enough.
but this is kind of more on the subject of world poverty than immigration.
on immigration, yes, its great to help people in need and make some sacrifices for the better of them, but the people who don't appreciate it, and begin taking advantage of the system. im not saying this is every case, but with screening, this can be completely or mostly eliminated.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 28 2003, 12:35 PM

Gahh! screening screening screening! Screening doesn't show up people's personalities, so how exactly is it supposed to help prevent all these people who take 'advantage' of being poor and afraid and persecuted?

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 28 2003, 01:00 PM

well with certain regulations, such as if they don't get a job in a certain amount of time you must go back, or similar rules, with exceptions aloud
the screening would be useful to check if immigrants have a recent criminal background, or a particularly bad one

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 20 2003, 08:44 PM

My Dad's From Ghana (in Africa) and there, you have to start speaking English on your first day of school; you don't really have a choice. If English is going to be introduced to the whole of Europe as a formal language, then in England, you shouldn't really need to learn a new language, but I think it would be good on the cultural perspective. Scholars don't learn ancient Egyptian, or the ancient Greek language because they believe it to be useful, they do it for the cultural aspects (I believe), and also for the knowledge that comes with it. I happen to be learning a language which I doubt anyone else here on the boards do, and which only a small number of people in the world do, just because I can be pleased with myself by learning a language which hardly anyone else knows, for the fun of it, and for the knowledge.

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 01:38 PM

I think that learning another language makes you think differently and being a lot more open. Yes, English is spoken everywhere but does that mean the English speakers shouldn't be bothered to try and learn some other languages even if it's only an interest of their own. I don't think it's fair either to think "I don't need to try and learn other languages as everybody talk's mine" I think we should all make an effort to try and be opened to new languages and make ourselves be proud of our communication skills

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 21 2003, 01:42 PM

Go Helena!  Ok, so a lot of people speak English - but that's no reason to stop yourself opening up to another language yourself. Once you lean a language - its almost like a ticket to another culture, and it widens your horizons a lot. People shouldn't just sit down and expect the whole world to learn English just cos its easier for them. Learning another language is about more than asking directions when you're on holiday, its really really useful, and celebrates a country's individuality and culture. Phew!

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 21 2003, 01:47 PM

Not only that, but because it is fun!!! I love learning languages. I love not having to look up a particular word up in a book when I'm on holiday. I love that the words come naturally to me just like English does. At the moment, I'm learning both French and German, and I really like it when I can pick up words an say "Hey, that word means tie in German too!" or "Hey, that word means computer in English too!" I know I may be expressing myself a bit much here, but I really do like languages. Even if every country in the world spoke English, I'd still like to learn French, or German, (as I said before) just for the fun, or just for the knowledge.

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 21 2003, 07:26 PM

I live in France and often travel to Spain. I was amazed by the influence of England and the United States has on these two countries. I ve heard that its the same throughout the rest of Europe. face it Europe, you've already got a strong Anglo American influence, Europe's national language should be English

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 09:30 PM

Well you are a bit too proud I think Sam. How long have you been living in France may I ask you?? Oh right:... Just letting you know that Spain and France are "old" countries with languages that come both from Latin (just thought you might want t know things before judging) and that English doesn't. Here's a point. We have completely different cultures, food, language and style compared to the English and American ones. America is a new country with little history. How many Romanic and gothic cathedrals from the 10nth century have you seen in America (if you've been to it)?? humm..yeh...none! Well guess what??? We do have some in Spain and France you know??
Yes, American influence is everywhere...it's a big country and very powerful. Ok. But England is influenced by it too you know?? Rap didn't come from London sorry.
And were exactly did you go in Spain?? Probably a tourist place were English speakers usually go in summer and that's why most of the people speak English. Because as you said : "it should be the national language". Firstable, it isn't a nation, secondly, you can go and tell Europe that it should speak English!
HA!

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 21 2003, 09:46 PM

I'm sorry to prove you wrong Helena but if you pick up a Spanish or French or even German magazine you'll see what i mean. I'm not being racist or over proud on any level (in fact i love Spain) but all im saying is that Europe (not Spain) seriously has a anglo American influence. In Spain or ITALY OR Greece there are far more German and Dutch tourists than British. answer that. I've been living in France 3 years and have traveled far, and yes England has a huge American influence but look at this equation
England + Europe + US influence= English language. Oh and the past culture and gothic churches (?) has very little to do with the future one. i think you have to realise that the world is changing fast.
And answer this even though it seems a bit weird.
How come so many British popstars, rock bands actors make it so big in Spain, and the biggest hit from Spain in ages has been Las Ketchup?

Posted by: IST_Kayleigh_H Mar 23 2003, 02:49 PM

When i started to read this you were all on about English being the main language of Europe, i was thinking why English, why not Spanish, French, German... Then at the end of reading it all i realised that this very forum is conducted in English. In fact, 60% of all internet communication is in English, followed by 38% in Chinese. The point being it is being influenced and driven strongly by the technology of the internet.

The French government made certain attempts to regulate the amount of English used in France. The banned English phrases such as
"parking"
"weekend"
"shopping"
These phrases are still used in the French language, because of influences such as the internet, advertising, and movies. These attempts are similar to planting seeds during a hurricane. The hurricane being the internet. It simply blows everything aside in its path.

Posted by: IST_Grace_B Mar 23 2003, 04:08 PM

First of all i think it is a shame if you go through your whole life without learning, or being in a position to use a language other than your mother tongue. Studying another language is a great opportunity and opens doors to many jobs and activities in your later life. i think having a European language is an absolute joke. i'm sorry if i way something that isn't true here but as I've flicked through the posts in this topic a lot of people believe that it would probably be English which would become "the language". It's easy enough for you to say that, but i don't think you'd be so happy if the European language ended up being something random like potages or Greek. not that I've got anything against them i think they're beautiful languages but do you see my point?
It is true though, that most countries that you go to nowadays, you'll always find your hotel owner/shopkeeper etc.. will speak either English/French/German. So you can make yourself understood...eventually.
Another point which i think is a very important one is that before the Russian Revolution, most of (or all of) the Russian upper class spoke French.

Posted by: IST_Rachelle_W Mar 24 2003, 09:06 PM

I think that people should try to learn as many languages as possible as well as they can. It is a good opportunity to learn and progress and when you are traveling it makes you seem a little more intelligent instead of just trying to sit there and say it all with your hands. Even though most people speak English it is rather arrogant of us to expect them to go to all of the trouble to learn instead of us.

Many people complain about the influence English is having on their language. But it is all just a natural process. Languages change all of the time. The Old English is very different than the language we use today because of the influence that other languages have had upon it.

Posted by: IST_Hannah_T Mar 25 2003, 06:52 PM

HEYA EVERYBODY!!! Wow it is so interesting to talk like this! everyone is being so brainy! so anyways....I am kind of in agreement with everyone! i do think that English has naturally progressed to being the international language, most international things are in the language of the country where they are made, Spanish, German, French, and nearly always in English.
I mean, I was in Brussels airport 3 days ago, and all the signs were in English..all the advertisements and everything....I could have been anywhere...and in Airbus, the language is English...my dad speaks French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese and English, but he only speaks English at work to EVERYONE!
But that is just the other point...introducing a new European language would ruin countries' roots, and strip them of more individuality; their culture and history. To be honest, I think it is good the way it is going...as was previously mentioned in another post...the "official" language internationally is English, because of cinema, computers, the US influence, etc...but ppl still have their own languages. I think that's great..and I feel very lucky that my mother tongue is English...although i would feel very uncultured if i didnt endeavour to learn more languages....so i am continuing to improve my French...and learning Spanish on account of my dad's argentine backgrounds!! i would also like to learn Italian in the future!
so it now appears i have written an essay.... well congrats for reading this far and i promise the next time i write it will be a WHOLE LOT SHORTER!!
see yas

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 20 2003, 07:48 PM

I have to say, even though I have lived in France for half a year now, and have been to loads of other countries, inside of Europe and outside, and yet I still consider myself as English, not British, but English. I guess that's because I've only lived in England before. I've been to Wales two or three times, but not Scotland, nor Ireland. I think if I had been to these places frequently, then I may find myself a British citizen. As for my time in France, I'm just thinking of this as an extended holiday where I go to school . I guess I still need a little more experience here to call myself European.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 21 2003, 10:18 AM

My mom is half Mexican and half Greek, and my father is Norwegian. i was born in Norway and although i have lived most of my life in America, after i lived in Cyprus, and i now live in France, i feel Norwegian and Greek and Mexican. i think that your nationality is not where you were born, but how you feel because i always feel more European than American.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 21 2003, 10:43 AM

I don't know how you would define nationality - is it how you feel, your blood or where you were born? I think that people can 'feel' like they are more than one nationality (like Charlie) but this can get complicated when it comes to like passports.

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 21 2003, 09:56 PM

Helena, i think you are being a bit extremist about things. If you were English you'd understand. Spain is very much continental European. Britain is right out there across the channel. Although we politically are European, we really don't feel European. Our nationality is very confusing in the UK. You could be English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, Cornish, Celtic etc. In Europe its different. In the UK its different because we can be from anywhere. If your English then yes you are European but may not consider yourself to be.
I hope you will now understand, being Spanish it would be hard to . Sorry!
PS, Spain Rocks!

Posted by: IST_Helena_T Mar 21 2003, 10:03 PM

Don't say sorry. If you were then you would think about things twice before writing them down. Just letting you know (again) that in Spain, you can be, Spanish, Catalan, "gall ego", basso, Andale, canaries... And you know what?? the Catalans, Gallegos and Basques all have their own little language! But we still alllll feel European. I suppose that if you were Spanish you would understand..."sorry"

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 24 2003, 11:10 AM

I was born in Russia and lived there for 15 years. I love my country with all its advantages and disadvantages and I'm proud to be Russian. But for me it doesn't mean that I will ever let myself to be disrespectful to other nations. On the contrary i'm happy to get into other cultures and to try to feel myself native in other countries.
I just mean that even though we are from different countries and we love them, are proud that we are British or American or Russian, etc.. It doesn't matter, because we all have something similar and if countries of Europe decided to unite in European union and their citizens are European now, it doesn't mean that they stopped being English or French of German; they just became closer to each other.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 24 2003, 04:38 PM

I suppose a lot of it has to do with culture - and language as well. But then again, I know people like Simon who came to France when they were really young and maybe identify better with French culture rather than English, maybe it all depends on the person. I think family plays a big part in your 'attachment' to a place, because then it feels more like that country is where your 'roots' are, like even though I've never lived in Ireland, I still feel attached to it because I know my ancestors came from there and my family's history has taken place there. Also, memories make you attached to places, to me, England will always be the place i grew up n and therefore a country that has affected me a lot.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 25 2003, 02:51 PM

i agree with Zhenia in that all people are people and we shouldn't judge someone on where they are from, what color their skin is, or what religion they practice; and the idea of the motherland. its interesting to see how people class people under nationality. for example, although i lived in the states for most of my life, have the American accent, and know and enjoy many aspects of American culture, i have never, and will never, be American or feel American, it might be because i am so proud of my blood motherlands (Norway, where i was born, Greece + Mexico). my brother, of course, has the same heritage as me, but because he was born in Cyprus, he sometimes counts himself a Cypriot, and my sister, who was born and has lived her whole life in Texas, sees herself as a true Texan. we all have the same relatives and blood, but we all feel we are from different parts of the world. i do think that your nationality is where you feel a bond to, but where you were born is not nearly as important as what your heritage is. i mean, i love Australia, and i feel very at home there, even though i have been there only once, but i cant say im Australian.

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 25 2003, 05:53 PM

I agree. Already, I have met many people in my class who have lived in a different country to the nationality that they class themselves as. You should class yourself yourself, not let other people do it for you.

Posted by: IST_Simone_S Mar 27 2003, 06:37 PM

Right, I have not been part of this conversation until now, and most has already been said. However this question about nationality is one that affects us all.
Zhenia said earlier on that she felt proud to be Russian... but doesn't everyone feel proud of their nationality? Well most of us do, as least, at some point in time... and our nationality makes us feel part of something, its like a "family". It makes people feel like they do have something to be apart of, something that gives them responsibility...
My friends often call me "European" due to the fact that I have lived most of my life in France, or England when I was very young, and my ancestors are mainly from Europe (Ireland, Norway, Sweden etc.) Up to now, I have never liked the idea of being "European", yet now that i think about it, the idea doesn't seem that bad, especially in a time when my country is involved in a war which put me in an awkward place, not sure of what to think. I feel a duty so support my country, especially with one of my family members on the front lines, yet the idea of my country bombing Baghdad horrifies me, and causes me to be ashamed.
In my village, my family has already been subject to anti-Americanism... And all this is because of our nationality?
It is most certainly difficult in such a position, and if I did decide to call myself European, it might be better. European is more vague... it isn't so stereotypical, people are less likely to judge you before they actually know you. After all, in the U.S.A, at the moment, people are judging the French on their politics... If people were European, instead of being just one nationality, they might not be subject to such harassment.

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 28 2003, 08:48 PM

Simone, I just wanted to tell you that i understand you really well. That is probably so hard for you now! But you know what? Don't be ashamed of your country, this war is not the fault of people and the country in the whole. Yes, I think American people made a big mistake when they chose Bush as their president, but look, loads of people are against war, loads of them go in the street and express their opinion openly. So, nobody can`t blame the whole country for its president. For example I'm Russian and I know that my country survived through some terrible years in times of USSR and it`s true that Stalin was severe and bad man, but it doesn`t make me, my family, all Russians and Russia by itself bad, does it? Your country, as well as all others, gave the world a lot, so you can be proud of it.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 27 2003, 08:38 PM

well Mimi, just to clear things up for you, im half Norwegian, 1/4 Greek, and 1/4 Mexican. i was born in Norway, in Bergen if you want to know, but lived in Texas for nine years. even though i have spent most of my life in Texas, although we always spent summer and winter in Norway, i have never felt Texan. this goes back to what i was saying earlier, in that what i think is important in identifying nationality is heritage (which for me is the above) and where you feel a connection or bond to, not necessarily where you have spent most of your life. i have always felt more Norwegian, or European, than anything else; one reason is that my Norwegian is much better than either my Greek or Mexican. so i am not Texan or from the USA
thank you

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 28 2003, 09:49 AM

Talk about international...seriously though, where do u feel at home? Do u always feel like a foreigner? And about your family - are they all really different to each other depending on what nationality they are? Which one are you closest to?

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 28 2003, 10:51 AM

well my father is 100 % Norwegian, although he has lived in other countries but still is, and will always be, Norwegian through and through. my mom was born in los Angeles, but lived in in Spain, Mexico, and Greece. her father is Greek and mother is Mexican.
i feel like a foreigner in most places, but because of the language, i can relate more to Norway.
i am closer to my dad in nationality because my mom is mixed and i don't speak either Greek or Mexican

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 28 2003, 12:18 PM

i can relate to my family, because they are, well, my family, even though we feel related to different places. but still, just like friends, nationality isn't and shouldn't be a factor in relationships.
am i the only one with this mixed up heritage, or are there other who feel like me?

Posted by: NW_Richard_F Mar 20 2003, 05:53 PM

The Euro is certainly easy, but I think lots of people here in Britain are against it because it means change. For many, any change is bad. I'm honestly not sure what should be done. I'm interested in people's views. Has it really made any difference to your lives at all?

Posted by: IST_Kayleigh_H Mar 20 2003, 05:58 PM

Over here in France it really has made a difference. I don't really notice anything until i went on holiday to Spain i found that afterwards i had no spare coins and pennies lying around everything was a lot easier. I understand the England don't want change although they did change a while back from crowns and shillings and all of that. They don't seem to see how easy the euro makes travelling in Europe.

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 20 2003, 06:47 PM

I love the Euro! I have to say, it hasn't just made life a lot easier for me, but the rest of the countries using the new currency. It must make it a lot easier for business people exchanging goods between Europe. I think I really good thing about it is that it embodies a new Europe, one that everyone can get along. Countries like Sweden not using the Euro, I can understand, as they are not in the EU; but the UK are, and they still haven't taken it up. I believe this is because they are too ignorant to see the benefit that lies before them. Also, as already pointed out, Britain may not like change, thefore sticking to the traditional pound sterling. I thin the fact that the UK are not willing to embrace the new currency shows that they are not ready to embrace a new Europe.

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 23 2003, 08:44 PM

I want to reply to two topics here. Matthew said that the Euro takes away the culture and individuality of a country. I disagree in some respects. Each Euro coin has a symbol or picture on the back representing the country that it was made in. This still leaves a part of the country's individuality intact. I am a bit upset that my coin world money collection will never be complete now, but I guess that's something I'll have to live with.
Also, replying to Grace, Britain has always thought of itself as being the best country in the world, all throughout history, and now it just annoys them that America has come on to the scene, speaking their language, and inventing loadsa cool stuff that they wished that they had invented for themselves. I think they have to step back for a moment and realise that they are about as important of any other country in Europe. No one country is insignificant, and you can't out-rank countries in this matter, which is what I thin the British are trying to do right now.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 23 2003, 09:35 PM

im not British, but i think that most countries think they are the best, at least that's how i feel about Norway (sorry to everyone else, but i think Norway is the best), and i am happy that Norway has kept the kroner instead of adopting the euro. i agree with Matthew that the euro takes away some part of a countries culture, even if they are different designs in different countries. yes, it does have advantages and because ei moved from the states it makes it a lot easier for me to calculate about how much im paying, but i miss the Greek drachmas.

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 27 2003, 05:24 PM

I don't think we can base a country's culture on the currency it uses. Europe is not going to turn into a land of clones just because people find it easier and cheaper to use the Euro. It doesn't mean a destruction of culture, but a recognition of the rest of Europe as close neighbours. Its a really sensible step, and one that has taken a long time to come around, i think. I shouldn't be surprised if in the future, there was a worldwide currency. It just makes things easier, it doesn't steal a whole national identity!

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 28 2003, 12:23 PM

Does anybody here really think that euro can make countries indentical? I think using the same piece of metal to buy shoes in France and Germany doesn't make these countries clones!
Besides, when a country maintains a currency it doesn't ask all their people to vote which coins they are going to have. So, whose individuality does it define? Designers' one?
Sorry, if I offended anybody, that's just my thoughts

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 28 2003, 10:42 PM

Cool, I've finally managed to figure out this quoting thing! Anyway, Amelia said that they make things one cent cheaper to make it look like it's a pound cheaper. When I was in Britain, and buying Horrible Histories (favorite books at that time) I used to get really confused with the prices, as it said £3.99 on the back, and my Mom said that it was really £4. This got me really confused, and it still does now. I guess a pound or a euro doesn't make that much of a difference now, but it's still sometimes annoying, and I guess it's the same in every country.
Anyway, I wish I could stay up until 1 o'clock when this thing finishes, but alas, bed is calling. It's been really good meeting all these people on here, and it's been good to get to know some of my fellow schoolmates (even if I can't actually match the faces to the names). Goodbye!

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 20 2003, 08:55 PM

Whoops, my geography obviously isn't that good (don't tell Mr. Flynn!). It sounds good that so many countries are applying for membership into the EU at the moment. I just don't understand why there is so much of a wait? Is it something to do with the behaviour of the country in the past? Or some civil issues going on at the moment in the country? I don't see why everyone in Europe can't just have a big smile on, and welcome their neighbours with welcome arms. Maybe I'm just not seeing the 'political' side of things here.

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 20 2003, 10:34 PM

I think, Henry, the reason for not `welcoming their neighbours with welcome arms` is that before entering the union, according to its rules, each country should become a democratic one, where human rights are respected; it should have stable and competitive economy, be able to take over all rules and demands of EU. That all is not a question of one week or a month! Some countries fought for their independent and democracy throughout the centuries!
Besides, talking about possibility of integrating EU by these countries we forgot about outcome of it, if it finally happens! Surely, benefited for Eastern Europe is obvious! For EU it gives new jobs and work places, safety, it strengthens it as an unit, but... In this countries the labour is cheaper, thus the price of produced products is lower and customers in countries-neighbours will tend to buy them rather than products of their own country (especially as long as currency will be single). That's an obvious advantage for customers, but what about producers? Will not the growth of economy in Eastern Europe weaken the economy of Europe Western?

Posted by: IST_Graeme_V Mar 21 2003, 09:26 AM

I think that Eastern Europe is as much a part of Europe as France or Britain is, we have all been through the same disasters of the 20th century and are finally rid of the menaces of the past. I think EU membership should be given immediately to Eastern countries (including Turkey) and i do not see why it has not happened since the collapse of the Soviet Union? Also, answering the question about a European defense policy, i do not see why former Warsaw Pact members have not asked NATO about membership or if they have applied why have they been turned down? If everybody wants "one world" why are there still divisions and grudges? Peace, G

Posted by: IST_Henry_W Mar 22 2003, 03:39 PM

One aspect of this thing I think is that some of the Eastern Europe cultures are drastically different from the western Europeans, or perhaps just the way of life. Maybe western Europe thinks that the cultures are too similar to the Asian way of living.
Going back to what Helena said, there's an old proverb I remember; "Too many cooks spoil the broth." Maybe this suggests that the integration of Easter Europe will somehow ruin the rest of Europe.
I'd be interested on what other people have to say about this.

Posted by: IST_Grace_B Mar 23 2003, 10:40 PM

U wot?
I'm sorry but that is waaaaaay over my head there. and i'm sure i'm not the only one who has absolutely no clue as to what Zhenia is going on about... Help?!?!
What market is being discussed here? Yer weekly wee French one which is held on the village square just outside the church? i can understand that that would not bring benefits to member states.. aye..........

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 24 2003, 02:10 PM

I just wanted to say that when European countries unite together they trade with each other and other countries easily using one currency and getting benefits from this trade; but if there are poor countries i the union how are they gonna get any benefits?
Again, to become part of the union Eastern European countries were made to accept democracy. So if their integration to the union will fail, they can refuse from it! so, what about people who were hoping that they will get democratic government? Again, uniting with eastern Europe EU hopes it will become easy for Europeans people to travel there and to trade with these countries, but if the integration will fail? EU will have difficulties with it!

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 24 2003, 04:44 PM

I think that we shouldn't just focus on the economic benefits for the EU if other countries join, but the cultural and political ones as well. Although I agree with Helena's point about there maybe being too many already and that it will just take longer to organize things, I think that if membership is really strict then the EU will become a sort of elitist club, with only countries that play along to Western morals being able to join.

Posted by: IST_Sam_O Mar 25 2003, 09:53 AM

This forum has dramatically changed my opinions on political views and the arguments between me and Helena has broadened my views on European Issues. Being British, when im in England i feel totally isolated from Europe and i think British people have many differences between European. what do you think?

Posted by: IST_Amelia_K Mar 27 2003, 04:53 PM

I often get the feeling in England that people talk about 'Europe' as a very separate place, one to go for holidays and things, not one where they really belong. I'm not sure if this is all to do with the fact that its an island - a couple of kilometres of water doesn't change people's views that radically. Its more, I think, to do with people in England being really quite patriotic, and thinking themselves far far different culturally than the rest of Europe. I don't think it is that different culr=turally at all - or at least no more so than other European countries are from each other. It might be a language thing - but incidents such as not using the Euro only serve to isolate Britain more. I think its unfair that England cuts itself off so much from the rest of Europe, but then likes to take a lot of the power in the EU and places.

Posted by: IST_Hannah_T Mar 27 2003, 11:28 PM

I totally agree with Mimi (Amelia lol!) I have to got to bed now, tired: but I just wanted to say that I agree that Britain should not interfere with Europe so much if they think they are so different, like not having the Euro, driving on the other side of the road, even small things like the colours of the postboxes set Britain apart....and wanting to be "friends" with Europe, and the States, and within its own country (if u get what i mean)...well that's like having ur cake, and eating it too! I think Britain should get into the Euro, loads of other countries have it and it hasn't removed all their history, or the way their government works, and individual countries' Euros differ slightly from country to country, so if those royalists out there want the Queen's head on the money, as a sign of heritage and history or something, then a British Euro might have that on it! I think it's ridiculous that Britain distances itself from everything to do with that and most of the time is promoting things like peace (thru some twisted way with war with Iraq, but still, this is supposed to be helping things in the long run...) so anyways time for me to got to bed (and do history homework!!!!) but I hope someone replies...although I am pretty sure there are a lot of ppl who don't agree with me!
have fun.....
Hannah xXx

Posted by: IST_Matthew_A Mar 21 2003, 05:15 PM

Great idea having an permanent army to defend all the inhabitants of Europe. But I don't believe that it would work financially as different countries would contribute in different amounts (money, Men and weapons).
A well established country that has a good army and navy force would just be handing vulnerability and putting their army to the fate of Europe. Maybe a smaller country with no army or a small army would be handing them over to gain better protection than they would receive if they had to face a war by them self. In one way a country gains and in another way a country loses out.
Another problem would be that a country might not believe in the ethnics a war that was happening on the other side of Europe leading them not to want to support it by giving men and financial help defeating the object of a combined defence policy.
What would happen if a European country wanted to fight against another European country, will the European army fight against themselves?. To have a European army it would only work if there was a country called Europe instead of a continent.

Posted by: IST_Charlotte_G Mar 23 2003, 09:20 PM

i agree with Matthew's points, countries who already have a good defense wouldn't need to, or want to, create a European army at their loss. it would help smaller countries, but i still don't think it could work. what would happen if there was a disagreement that split Europe? like now, if there was one army for the whole of Europe, would we be in Iraq?? would the army have been split?? i don't think that it could prevent war, instead i believe it would cause tension. but why is there so much discussion on combining continent of Europe to create just one country? the euro, the defence policy. the curriculum, and the other topics would destroy each countries individuality. also, what if other continents followed suit, like Matthew said. i think that each country should have its own army, etc., even if some are more powerful than others

Posted by: IST_Simone_S Mar 27 2003, 06:50 PM

A combined defence policy? Its a really nice idea, but realistically, could it work? Would all the European countries agree when it should act, or will it just cause conflict and tension? And what, would each country have to contribute to this combined defence policy, so that Europe could have its own armed forced? Some countries surely wouldn't agree... They would surely not want to send equipment and soldiers to some other country for some issue that doesn't affect them.
Im not saying that im against it, just saying it seems impossible, or utopian as some people say. It would never work

Posted by: IST_Zhenia_P Mar 28 2003, 09:08 PM

Well, I just didn't think about all these points against! I agree now that this idea is pretty utopian. All these threats to other countries, arguments, etc...! Thinking about deeper I can add now that it also seems to be difficult to decide how this system should work. If finally countries will unite in a type of a military league what system will they choose for voting? If it will be one like in UN when one country disagree the decision can be positive, thus countries in this league will never reach a solution. Or what if they will form a coalition? that means control of power, using forces of neighbours! Yes, now for me it seems impossible.
But anyway it's a nice idea even though it's utopian. May be in the future next generations just will not need it as they will not have wars...Dreams, dreams! Sorry, that's just my light and probably also utopian view of future, just a hope...