S3BL100在 2005-5-25 05:08 PM 發表:
Well, this year's Paper II is like this:
2 comprehension passages
MC cloze
matching
proof reading: unlike the previous papers, one is only required to add missing words into a passage using words from a box provided. One does not need to cross out or change any words.
cloze: it's terrible; the question setter provides us with the first few letters of the word to be filled in, e.g. incl____, and one will immediately know that the letters"uding" should be put in.
So who is supposed to consider this paper difficult? Bear in mind, one does not need to work on opposites either.
Meanwhile you didn't answer my previous question:
I don't know what score does a student need to get for an A in English (Syl. B), so I can't come to any conclusion.Do you?
If you think this is irrelevant, please mention it and persuade me to accept this.Thanks in advance.
S3BL100在 2005-5-25 05:08 PM 發表:
It is true that many are not willing to major in Chinese, but those who major in Chinese have at least some knowledge about Chinese culture.As for those who major in English, many didn't even show much improvement in the language after the 3-year programme.How, then, can such teachers who are poor in English teach our fellow students the correct uses of language?
Wait a minute.What major of "English" are you talking about?
Something like "English Department" in CUHK, or "English Education Major Programme" in Hong Kong Education Institution?These two are very different things!
S3BL100在 2005-5-25 05:08 PM 發表:
I know a 7-year-old child who is studying at a primary school in Kowloon East. What his English teacher teaches him is full of nonsense and wrong grammar. For if the foundation of knowledge in English language of the child is laid on tonnes of misconception, how can he learn the language well (I do not mean master it) when he furthers his studies?
Full of?I did see such things either, but I don't see the condition is as bad as you mention.
After all, you are sooooo irritated abuut the condition nowadays, did you do anything to change it?For example, to be a English tutor and correct them.(Don't say it's useless compared with the number of students affected by bad teachers, since there are still tonnes of people as angry with the situation as you do)
[ Last edited by 238X on 2005-5-25 at 20:39 ]
At present,i 've been going to an evening english class(by The British Council),
i'm really want ot improve my english speaking /listening skill ,
and learn more vocabulary.
but i think is really hard to improve these in HK i think.
Although i'm working in Airport now,,it's more chance to talk with people who from different country.But its also hard to improve these.
Sometimes i speak to foreigner,maybe i can't use the right Grammar/vocab to speak to them.
Although they said they know what i mean,but i think i must improve my english.
*Maybe my grammar,vocab are wrong ,but if you find my mistake,please told me
thanks a lot
eg8739在 2005-5-26 09:50 PM 發表:
1. but i think is really hard to improve these in HK i think.
2. Although i'm working in Airport now,,it's more chance to talk with people who from different country.But its also hard to improve these.
Correct grammer:
1.but I think the skills are really hard to be improved in Hong Kong.
2.As I am working in the airport now,there will be more chances to talk with people who come from different countries.However,the communication skills are still pretty hard to be improved.
Hope this help.:D
ps.Good for you!I've heard that classes held by English Council are pretty good.
[ Last edited by joeli16 on 2005-5-27 at 17:17 ]
238X在 2005-5-25 08:36 PM 發表:
Meanwhile you didn't answer my previous question:
I don't know what score does a student need to get for an A in English (Syl. B), so I can't come to any conclusion.Do you?
If you think ...
I do not know about it either, but then, remember, the papers never test you on things like phrasal verbs, and so on, which we have learnt in Form 3. This means that one does not need to be very proficient in English in order to get an A.
238X在 2005-5-25 08:36 PM 發表:
Wait a minute.What major of "English" are you talking about?
Something like "English Department" in CUHK, or "English Education Major Programme" in Hong Kong Education Institution?These two are very different things!
I mean both.
238X在 2005-5-25 08:36 PM 發表:
Full of?I did see such things either, but I don't see the condition is as bad as you mention.
After all, you are sooooo irritated abuut the condition nowadays, did you do anything to change it?For example, to be a English tutor and correct them.(Don't say it's useless compared with the number of students affected by bad teachers, since there are still tonnes of people as angry with the situation as you do)
Well, tuition does not make students improve much in most (but not all) cases. Besides, who do children see more often per week, their teachers at school or tutors?
And by the way, here is a correction of the first sentence of this quoted paragraph:
"Full of? I have seen such things too, but I don't think that the condition is as bad as what you mentioned."
S3BL100在 2005-5-27 10:46 PM 發表:
I do not know about it either, but then, remember, the papers never test you on things like phrasal verbs, and so on, which we have learnt in Form 3. This means that one does not need to be very proficient in English in order to get an A.
I just want to ask:Are these topics supposed to be essential in our everyday life?
S3BL100在 2005-5-27 10:46 PM 發表:
Well, tuition does not make students improve much in most (but not all) cases. Besides, who do children see more often per week, their teachers at school or tutors?
Sorry, but such a significance really does not relate to who they are seeing more frequently.I know it because I was a tutor too and I have experience about it.
Moreover, do teachers whom YOU see more frequently necessarily affect you more?Don't treat everybody as if they don't know to think independently and don't know who to believe -- at least I am not so pessimistic!
S3BL100在 2005-5-27 10:46 PM 發表:
And by the way, here is a correction of the first sentence of this quoted paragraph:
"Full of? I have seen such things too, but I don't think that the condition is as bad as what you mentioned."
I am afraid that I want to object your correction to the first part of second sentence (the bolded one).I insist I was right in that one.May you kindly tell me what's wrong in my original sentence?
P.S.That whole paragraph is talking about my observation, not my imaginary opinion, that's why I use "see" instead of "think" -- so strictly speaking I don't think I was making grammatical mistake in the whole paragraph.Your action is actually making my statement less persuasive.
[ Last edited by 238X on 2005-5-28 at 00:17 ]
238X在 2005-5-28 12:01 AM 發表:
I just want to ask:Are these topics supposed to be essential in our everyday life?
I suppose so, since if you get them mixed up you may fail to understand what a person is talking about.
238X在 2005-5-28 12:01 AM 發表:
Sorry, but such a significance really does not relate to who they are seeing more frequently.I know ...
Bear in mind that this is true for many aspects. One learns from others all the time, good or bad, you know.
As for the grammatical problem,
1. "I did see this either": In this case the word "either" is usually used only for negative cases; for positive cases use "too" instead.
2. "I dont' see the situation is ...": To me, this just sounds weird. Adding the word "that" makes it better.
S3BL100在 2005-5-29 10:42 PM 發表:
I suppose so, since if you get them mixed up you may fail to understand what a person is talking about.
Maybe I don't use them much, so I don't think so.
S3BL100在 2005-5-29 10:42 PM 發表:
Bear in mind that this is true for many aspects. One learns from others all...
The point is you changed the word "see" into "think", and that's what makes me dissatisfied.You didn't answer me about this.(A mistake was corrected in this paragraph)
[ Last edited by 238X on 2005-5-30 at 00:17 ]