Canada is a good example of the way peoples of different ways of life and dif-ferent languages can live side by side under one government. The population of Canada has risen from 11,5 million in 1941 to 25 million in 1980. Most of the new-comers are from Europe, Asia and the USA, so that today less than 44% of Can-ada’s population is of British origin. Quebec Province is still 90% French. There are some groups of French Canadiands in Ontario and Manitoba, but the numbers are quite small.
There are many Indians, Pacistanis and Chinese, and also blacks from the USA, among the immigrants who are pouring into Canada now. Some Canadians are afraid that before long Canada will have coloured citizens that white. Other Canadians are disturbed by the growing racism in their country. Canada, like so many countries, has only just begun to treat her own non-white citizens, Eskimos (or Inuit) and the Indians, as generously as they deserve. The Indian and Eskimo populations have grown quite a lot in the last few years. The government is at last realizing that it has a duty towards this people that it has neglected for so long.
All Canadian children have to learn both French and English at school, but Francophones and Anglophones do not enjoy learning each other’s language. Still, most Quebecois middle class families, living in Montreal are bilingual - they speak English and French equally well.
Until the Second World War, every Canadian province except Quebec was overwhelmingly British. Some Canadians were more patriotic than the British them-selves and were really angry if anyone walked out of a cinema while ‘God Save the King’ was being played. Now Canadians think of themselves as a people in their own right, not tied to either Britain or the USA. The USA has not been a threat to Canada for almost two hundred years. In fact, the 6,416 km US-Canadian frontier is the long-est continuous frontier in the world, has no wire fence, no soldiers, no guns on either side. It is called ‘The Border’.
To start with, nowadays there are lots of hot debates about computers in the school. Some people strongly assure that they could replace teachers, however, others disagree, singling out that new technologies have a great deal of drawbacks.
I definitely stand for the second point of view. My first argument is that computers are quite harmful not only for the eyes of children, but for thier nervous system too. Because of this they become agressive, tired and cannot concentrate on the work. Furthermore, pupils can misuse computers: it is possible to chat or play the games instead of learning. What is more, today it is very dangerous to rely on computers. If it breaks down, your information will be lost.
However, there are some people who are fully against it. They point out that with computers it is simply enough to make tests and check them. I agree up to the point, but it must be taken into consideration that in this way pupils have more possibilities to answer with the help of classmates and there is nobody to control them. Moreover, they are trying to persuade that that computer can manage every work you want it to do. I strongly disagree, as I do believe, that only the teacher could explain difficult problems to the children, so that they understand it.
To sum up, it is not an easy question to answer and opinions are different. Personally I am in favour of learning with the help of teachers. To my mind, nothing could take their place. :)