In this blog, teachers, students and all those who have some kind of interest in the English language will find useful, interesting, curious and funny things to be used in their classes or for their personal enjoyment.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
TOEFL Video-Different instructors and students´ comments-2011
http://www.toeflgoanywhere.org/enewsletter/february2011/TOEFL-Passport.html
TIPS FOR TEACHERS OF ENGLISH
TIPS FOR TEACHERS OF ENGLISH
________________________________________
Here are some tips to help you on your teaching experience.
1. Dress right. Jeans, sneakers, and just-out-of-bed hair may be okay for teachers in the U.S., but in many parts of the world, a neat appearance counts far more than credentials. In Korea dark clothes lend an air of authority. Red is to be avoided at all costs. In Morocco female teachers don’t wear pants, sleeveless blouses, or short skirts.
2. Behave appropriately. When it asked 250 students at the Sichuan Institute of Foreign Languages in China what they liked and disliked about native speaker English teachers, the students’ main gripe was the informality of foreign teachers, who often seem to undermine their own authority by acting in undignified ways. In the U.S. teachers go on a first-name basis with students, sit on their desks, sip coffee, and even bounce off the walls without causing student discomfort or losing prestige. But these behaviors don’t export well.
3. Don’t worry if students seem unresponsive at first. Americans are used to participatory classrooms with plenty of teacher-student dialogue. Elsewhere, students are often trained to be silent, good listeners, and memorizers. It’s disconcerting to stand in front of a sea of blank faces, but expecting it reduces the shock. Introduce new concepts, such as discussion and role-play gradually. You’ll be surprised at how students will come to embrace the change.
4. Choose topics carefully. There are still many countries in the world where people are hesitant to voice opinions because of a fear of reprisal. If you’re conducting a classroom debate, remember that there’s a distaste for Western-style argumentation in Middle-Eastern societies, and in Japan it’s offensive for an individual to urge others to accept his opinion.
Certain topics may be taboo for cultural reasons: Most Americans don’t want to discuss their salaries or religious beliefs; Japanese may be disinclined to talk about their inner feelings; the French think questions about their family life are rude.
5. Don’t ask, “Do you understand?” In China and Japan, students will nod yes, even if they’re totally lost, in an attempt to save face for the teacher. Even in a country as far west as Turkey, yes often means no.
6. Avoid singling students out. Our society fosters a competitive individualism which is clearly manifested in our classrooms. American students are not shy about displaying their knowledge. In classrooms outside the U.S., however, showing solidarity with classmates and conforming to the status quo is often more important than looking good for the teacher. In Turkey and Montenegro students told me they disliked volunteering answers too often because it made them look like show-offs and attracted the evil eye of envy. If you want to play a game, make the competition among groups rather than among individuals. If you need to discipline a student, do so in private.
7. Be aware of cross-cultural communication styles. French students appreciate wit. Venezuelan students like boisterous rapid-fire exchanges. In Japan, where debate is not as valued as in the U.S., students appreciate long pauses in discussions and silent “think time” after you ask a question. “Hollow drums make the most noise” goes a Japanese proverb, and Japanese students are uncomfortable blurting out the first thing that comes to mind. American teachers, who are uncomfortable with silence, tend to anticipate the student’s words or repeat their original question—both irritating interruptions for the Japanese student.
8. Present a rationale for what you do in class. Your pedagogy is going to be very different from what students are used to. They’ll conform much more eagerly to new classroom content and procedures if they understand the benefits.
9. Expect the best of your students. They’ll be serious about learning English because their economic advancement often depends upon mastering it.
10. Relax and enjoy yourself. Happiness in the classroom is contagious.
________________________________________
Here are some tips to help you on your teaching experience.
1. Dress right. Jeans, sneakers, and just-out-of-bed hair may be okay for teachers in the U.S., but in many parts of the world, a neat appearance counts far more than credentials. In Korea dark clothes lend an air of authority. Red is to be avoided at all costs. In Morocco female teachers don’t wear pants, sleeveless blouses, or short skirts.
2. Behave appropriately. When it asked 250 students at the Sichuan Institute of Foreign Languages in China what they liked and disliked about native speaker English teachers, the students’ main gripe was the informality of foreign teachers, who often seem to undermine their own authority by acting in undignified ways. In the U.S. teachers go on a first-name basis with students, sit on their desks, sip coffee, and even bounce off the walls without causing student discomfort or losing prestige. But these behaviors don’t export well.
3. Don’t worry if students seem unresponsive at first. Americans are used to participatory classrooms with plenty of teacher-student dialogue. Elsewhere, students are often trained to be silent, good listeners, and memorizers. It’s disconcerting to stand in front of a sea of blank faces, but expecting it reduces the shock. Introduce new concepts, such as discussion and role-play gradually. You’ll be surprised at how students will come to embrace the change.
4. Choose topics carefully. There are still many countries in the world where people are hesitant to voice opinions because of a fear of reprisal. If you’re conducting a classroom debate, remember that there’s a distaste for Western-style argumentation in Middle-Eastern societies, and in Japan it’s offensive for an individual to urge others to accept his opinion.
Certain topics may be taboo for cultural reasons: Most Americans don’t want to discuss their salaries or religious beliefs; Japanese may be disinclined to talk about their inner feelings; the French think questions about their family life are rude.
5. Don’t ask, “Do you understand?” In China and Japan, students will nod yes, even if they’re totally lost, in an attempt to save face for the teacher. Even in a country as far west as Turkey, yes often means no.
6. Avoid singling students out. Our society fosters a competitive individualism which is clearly manifested in our classrooms. American students are not shy about displaying their knowledge. In classrooms outside the U.S., however, showing solidarity with classmates and conforming to the status quo is often more important than looking good for the teacher. In Turkey and Montenegro students told me they disliked volunteering answers too often because it made them look like show-offs and attracted the evil eye of envy. If you want to play a game, make the competition among groups rather than among individuals. If you need to discipline a student, do so in private.
7. Be aware of cross-cultural communication styles. French students appreciate wit. Venezuelan students like boisterous rapid-fire exchanges. In Japan, where debate is not as valued as in the U.S., students appreciate long pauses in discussions and silent “think time” after you ask a question. “Hollow drums make the most noise” goes a Japanese proverb, and Japanese students are uncomfortable blurting out the first thing that comes to mind. American teachers, who are uncomfortable with silence, tend to anticipate the student’s words or repeat their original question—both irritating interruptions for the Japanese student.
8. Present a rationale for what you do in class. Your pedagogy is going to be very different from what students are used to. They’ll conform much more eagerly to new classroom content and procedures if they understand the benefits.
9. Expect the best of your students. They’ll be serious about learning English because their economic advancement often depends upon mastering it.
10. Relax and enjoy yourself. Happiness in the classroom is contagious.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
McKinsey Quarterly-The Rise of the Networked Enterprise-Web 2.0
McKinsey on
Business Technology
2011
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
McKinsey’s new survey research finds that companies using the Web intensively gain greater market share and higher margins.
1 Robert M. Solow, “We’d better watch out,” New York Times, July 12, 1987.
2 See “How businesses are using Web 2.0: A McKinsey Global Survey,” mckinseyquarterly.com, March 2007; “Building the Web 2.0 Enterprise: McKinsey Global Survey Results,” mckinseyquarterly.com, July 2008; “How companies
are benefiting from Web 2.0: McKinsey Global Survey Results,” mckinseyquarterly
.com, September 2009;
and Michael Chui, Andy Miller, and Roger P. Roberts, “Six ways to make Web 2.0 work,” mckinseyquarterly.com, February 2009.
3
Facebook. Recently, the technologies have been migrating into the enterprise, with the promise of creating new gains to augment those generated
by the earlier wave of IT adoptions.3 The patterns of adoption and diffusion for the social Web’s enterprise applications appear to resemble those of earlier eras: a classic S-curve, in which early adopters learn to use a new technology, and adop-
tion then picks up rapidly as others begin to recognize its value. The implications are far reach-
ing: in many industries, new competitive battle lines may form between companies that use the Web in sophisticated ways and companies that feel uncomfortable with new Web-inspired manage-ment styles or simply can’t execute at a sufficiently high level (see sidebar, “Managing the Web-
based organization”).
The findings
Our annual surveys of Web 2.0 use in the enterprise provided the basis for the findings in this article. The present survey, our fourth, garnered responses from 3,249 executives across a range of regions, industries, and functional areas. Two-thirds of the respondents reported using Web 2.0 in their organizations. As in past surveys, we asked respon-
dents about their patterns of Web 2.0 use, the measurable business benefits they derived from it, and the organizational impact of Web technol-ogies. We also inquired about the market position of the respondents’ companies, whether
their market share had changed, and how their operating margins compared with those of competitors in the same industries.
Web 2.0 technologies are now more
widely used
The share of companies where respondents report using Web 2.0 technologies continues to grow. Our research, for instance, shows significant increases in the percentage of companies using social networking (40 percent) and blogs (38 percent). Furthermore, our surveys show that the number of employees using the dozen Web 2.0 technologies continues to increase.4 Respondents at nearly half of the companies that use social networking
say, for example, that at least 51 percent of their employees use it. And in 2010, nearly two-
thirds of respondents at companies using Web 2.0 say they will increase future investments in
these technologies, compared with just over half
in 2009. The healthy spending plans during
both of these difficult years underscore the value companies expect to gain.
Among respondents at companies using Web 2.0,
a large majority continue to report that they
are receiving measurable business benefits—with nearly nine out of ten reporting at least one.
These benefits ranged from more effective market-ing to faster access to knowledge (Exhibit 1).
Toward the networked enterprise
We analyzed the shared characteristics of groups
of organizations in our survey and clustered
them according to the magnitude of the business benefits respondents reported from the use
of Web 2.0 tools and technologies. Our analysis revealed striking differences.
Among respondents who say their companies are using Web 2.0, most (79 percent) achieved
a mean improvement of 5 percent or less across a range of business benefit metrics (Exhibit 2). Respondents at the companies in this group report the lowest percentages of usage among their employees, customers, and business partners;
say that Web 2.0 is less integrated into their employees’ day-to-day work than respondents at other companies do; and are least likely to
Takeaways
A new class of company is emerging that uses collaborative Web 2.0 tech-nologies to connect
its employees and to forge close networks with cus-tomers, business partners, and suppliers.
These networked enter-prises are becoming more competitive, showing improved performance in three areas: market
share gains, market leader-ship, and higher margins.
Intensive use of social technologies is central. But even more important, companies must adopt man-
agement innovations to realize a truly transforma-tional impact.
At leading companies, information flows are less likely to be hierarchical, allowing employees at lower levels to make decisions.
3 Andrew McAfee, Enterprise 2.0: New Collaborative Tools for Your Organization’s Toughest Challenges, Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press, 2009.
4 For more details, see “Business and Web 2.0: An interactive feature,” mckinseyquarterly.com, December 2010.
4
McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
% of respondents whose companies are achieving specified benefits from their use of Web 2.0 technologies1A majority of respondents say their companies enjoy measurable business benefits from using Web 2.0.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 1 of 31 Includes respondents who are using at least 1 Web 2.0 technology.Internal purposes, n = 1,598Customer-related purposes, n = 1,708Median improvement, %Working with external partners/suppliers, n = 1,088Increasing speed of access to knowledgeIncreasing speed of access to knowledge77Reducing communication costsReducing communication costs60Increasing employee satisfaction41Reducing time to market for products/services29Increasing number of successful innovations for new products or services28Decreasing travel costs44Reducing operational costs40Increasing revenue18Increasing speed of access to internal experts52301020202020101530Increasing effective-ness of marketing63AwarenessConsiderationConversionLoyaltyIncreasing customer satisfaction50Reducing travel costs2924Increasing number of successful innovations for new products/servicesReducing support costs35Reducing time to market for products/services2624Increasing revenueIncreasing revenueReducing marketing costs45201510101820151020101557Increasing speed of access to external experts53Increasing satisfaction of suppliers, partners, external experts38Reducing time to market for products/ services22Reducing supply chain costsReducing product- development costs22Reducing travel costs4028Increasing number of successful innovations for new products/services20164520152010152520151120
Exhibit 1
A majority of respondents say their companies enjoy measurable business benefits from using Web 2.0.
Respondents at half of the internally networked
organizations reported that Web 2.0 is integrated tightly
into their work flows.
5
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
report high levels of collaboration or information sharing across the organization. We call these companies, still learning the ropes of Web 2.0,
the “developing” group.
Three types of organizations, however, seem to have learned how to realize a much higher level of business benefits from their use of Web 2.0.
Internally networked organizations. Some companies are achieving benefits from using Web 2.0 primarily within their own corporate walls. The survey results indicate that companies in this group—13 percent of those using Web 2.0—derive substantial benefits from deploying these technologies in employee interactions. Respon-dents at such organizations report a higher percentage of employees using Web 2.0 than respondents at developing organizations do. Respondents at half of the internally networked organizations reported that Web 2.0 is inte-
grated tightly into their work flows, for example, compared with only 21 percent of respondents
at developing organizations. Web 2.0 also seems
to promote significantly more flexible processes
at internally networked organizations: respondents say that information is shared more readily and less hierarchically, collaboration across organiza-tional silos is more common, and tasks are
more often tackled in a project-based fashion.
Externally networked organizations. Other companies (5 percent of those deploying Web 2.0) achieved substantial benefits from interactions
that spread beyond corporate borders by using Web 2.0 technologies to interact with cus-
tomers and business partners, according to survey results. Executives at these organizations
reported larger percentages of their employees, customers, and partners using Web 2.0 than respondents at internally networked organizations did. But the responses suggest that the internal organizational processes of externally networked organizations are less fluid than those of
internally networked ones.
Fully networked enterprises. Finally, some companies use Web 2.0 in revolutionary ways. This elite group of organizations—3 percent of those
in our survey—derives very high levels of benefits from Web 2.0’s widespread use, involving employees, customers, and business partners, according to the survey. Respondents at these organizations reported higher levels of employee benefits than internally networked organiza-
tions did, as well as higher levels of customer and partner benefits than did externally networked organizations. In applying Web 2.0 technologies, fully networked enterprises seem to have
moved much further along the learning curve than other organizations have. The integration of
Web 2.0 into day-to-day activities is high, executives say, and they report that these technologies are promoting higher levels of collaboration by helping to break down organizational barriers that impede information flows.
Capturing competitive advantage
Executives at the more highly networked companies in our survey reported that they captured
a broad set of benefits from their Web investments.
A key question remained, however: do these benefits translate into fundamental performance improvements, measured by self-reported market share gains and higher profits?
We performed a series of statistical analyses to better understand the relationship between
our categories of networked organizations and three core self-reported performance metrics: market share gains, operating profits, and market leadership. Exhibit 3 shows the results.
6 McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
Market share gains reported by respondents were significantly correlated with fully networked
and externally networked organizations. This, we believe, is statistically significant evidence that technology-enabled collaboration with external stakeholders helps organizations gain market share from the competition. They do this, in our experience, by forging closer marketing relationships with customers and by involving them in customer support and product-development efforts. Respondents at companies
Managing the Web-based organization
Respondents report that a variety of organizational structures
and units manage Web 2.0. This year’s results show that
the IT department is most likely to oversee internal Web initiatives
(61 percent of respondents). For customer-facing initiatives,
74 percent of respondents say that oversight falls to the marketing department. For Web 2.0 initiatives involving external suppliers
and partners, roughly equal numbers of respondents cite the IT, marketing, and business-development functions. Financing
comes from a variety of places, including the IT function, central corporate sources, and discretionary funds at the business
unit level.
The social nature of most Web technologies, of course, opens companies to greater interaction with the outside world. To manage this change, a slim majority of respondents (51 percent) say
their companies have adopted formal social-media policies; com-
panies with higher levels of Web 2.0 adoption are likelier to have them. In most cases, only a few employees are authorized to speak on behalf of the company.that used Web 2.0 to collaborate across organizational silos and to share information more broadly also reported improved market shares.
The attainment of higher operating margins (again, self-reported) than competitors correlated
with a different set of factors: the ability to make decisions lower in the corporate hierarchy and
a willingness to allow the formation of working teams comprising both in-house employees
and individuals outside the organization. These findings suggest that Web technologies can underwrite a more agile organization where front-
line staff members make local decisions and companies are better at leveraging outside resources to raise productivity and to create more valuable products and services. The result, the survey suggests, is higher profits.
Market leadership, which we ascribed to those organizations where respondents reported a top ranking in industry market share, correlated positively with internally networked organizations that have high levels of organizational collab-oration. Self-reported market leadership
also, however, correlated negatively with externally networked organizations. We believe it is unlikely that better interactions with external stakeholders lead to a decline in market position. A more
likely explanation for the data is that market leaders use Web 2.0 to strengthen internal collaboration, seeking to enhance the organiza-tional resiliency required to maintain their leadership positions. Market challengers, by contrast, may be more focused on external
uses of Web 2.0 to win customers from
industry leaders.
Overall, we found that respondents at 27 percent
of the companies in our survey reported having both market share gains against their competitors
7
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
Different types of networked organizations achieve different benefits.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 2 of 31 Specifically, respondents who reported Web 2.0 being very or extremely integrated into employees’ day-to-day work activities.2Specifically, respondents who strongly agreed that these characteristics applied to their companies.Less networked, n = 1,711Organization type Internally networked, n = 287Externally networked, n = 100Fully networked, n = 76 Benefits, mean % improvementDegree of usageIntegration, % of respondents1Organizational impact, % of respondents2Employee benefit metricsCustomer benefit metricsPartner benefit metrics% of employees using Web 2.0% of customers using Web 2.0% of partners using Web 2.0Web 2.0 integrated into day-to-day workIncreased information sharingLess hierarchical information flowsCollaboration across organizational silosTasks tackled in project-based wayDecisions made lower in corporate hierarchyWork performed by mix of internal and external people854312121334217951051985049524253402414312110919595343475925151914151731246270554766493925412927
Exhibit 2
Different types of networked organizations achieve different benefits.
and higher profit margins. That kind of perfor-mance clearly makes these companies profit consolidators in their industries, with earnings growing faster than the rest. Highly net-
worked enterprises were 50 percent more likely
to fall in this high-performance group than
other organizations were. This finding suggests that the fully networked enterprise could
become the benchmark for more vigorous compe-tition in many industries.
Moreover, the benefits from the use of collaborative technologies at fully networked organizations appear to be multiplicative in nature: these enter-
prises seem to be “learning organizations,”
in which lessons from interacting with one set
8 McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
• Integrate the use of Web 2.0 into employees’ day-to-day work activities. This practice is the key success factor in all of our analyses, as
well as other research we have done. What’s in the work flow is what gets used by employees and what leads to benefits.
• Continue to drive adoption and usage. Benefits appear to be limited without a base level of adoption and usage. Respondents who reported the lowest levels of both also reported the lowest levels of benefits.
• Break down the barriers to organizational change. Fully networked organizations appear to have more fluid information flows, deploy
of stakeholders in turn improve the ability
to realize value in interactions with others. If this hypothesis is correct, competitive advantage at these companies will accelerate as network effects kick in, network connections become richer,
and learning cycles speed up.
Going forward
The imperative for business leaders is clear: falling behind in creating internal and external net-
works could be a critical mistake. Executives need to push their organizations toward becoming
fully networked enterprises. Our research suggests some specific steps:
Statistical analyses offer insight into the relationship between use of Web 2.0 tools and three core self-reported corporate- performance metrics.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 3 of 3Web 2.0–related factors significantly correlated with corporate-performance metricsCorrelation coefficient(higher = greater correlation)P-value (less than 0.05 = statistically significant)1. Market share gains2. Operating margins compared with those of competitors3. Market leadership— ie, first in industry market shareExternally networked organizationFully networked organizationOrganizational collaboration: cooperation across organizational silos, more project-based handling of tasks, less hierarchical information flows, and increased information sharingExternally networked organizationInternally networked organizationOrganizational collaboration (see explanation above)Distributed decision making and work: decision-making power situated lower in corporate hierarchy, more working teams composed of employees and people outside organization .427.344.182–.362.075.077.065.001.019.011.038.008.029.026
Exhibit 3
Statistical analyses offer insight into the relationship between use of Web 2.0 tools and three core self-reported corporate-performance metrics.
9
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
The authors would like to acknowledge the important contributions of Angela Hung Byers and Martin Rouse.
Jacques Bughin (Jacques_Bughin@McKinsey.com) is a director in McKinsey’s Brussels office; Michael Chui (Michael_Chui@McKinsey.com), based in the San Francisco office, is a senior fellow of the McKinsey Global Institute. Copyright © 2011 McKinsey & Company. All rights reserved.
talent more flexibly to deal with problems, and allow employees lower in the corporate hierarchy to make decisions. Organizational collaboration is correlated with self-
reported market share gains; distributed decision making and work, with increased self-reported profitability.
• Apply Web 2.0 technologies to interactions with customers, business partners, and employees. External interactions are correlated with self-reported market share gains. So are internal organizational collaboration and flexibility,
and the benefits appear to be multiplicative. Fully networked organizations can achieve the
highest levels of self-reported benefits in all types of interactions.
Executive perspectives
We asked two executives about their views on the networked enterprise
and what comes next.
Jim Smith, Wells Fargo
Jim Smith is executive vice president and managing head of Internet Services Group at Wells Fargo, which began its online strategy 16 years ago. Today, the bank is moving forward using many elements of the networked enterprise—launching banking via mobile devices and deploying social technologies such as Twitter and blogs to forge broader relationships with its customers. Better data on consumers’ needs are helping the bank create higher-value services, and over time, Smith says, the goal is to involve a greater numbers of bankers in Web interactions. Visit “The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday,” on mckinseyquarterly.com, to listen to a podcast in which Smith discusses Wells Fargo’s Web strategy and the cultural changes it has wrought.
Robert Stephens, Best Buy
Robert Stephens is chief technology officer of the electronics retailer Best Buy and founder of Geek Squad, the company’s technical-services business. Stephens envisions social and mobile technologies as key tools to helping Best Buy become a vast knowledge network where customers would have access to employees worldwide, both to inform themselves about products and to find answers to problems. Creating a networked enterprise, Stephens believes, means that all employees—from the executive suite down to the store level—need to be committed users of emerging technologies. Above all, those who interact directly with customers need to be curious about what consumers really want. Visit “The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday,” on mckinseyquarterly.com, to listen to a podcast in which Stephens discusses Best Buy’s initiatives and how the networked enterprise creates competitive advantage.
Business Technology
2011
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
McKinsey’s new survey research finds that companies using the Web intensively gain greater market share and higher margins.
1 Robert M. Solow, “We’d better watch out,” New York Times, July 12, 1987.
2 See “How businesses are using Web 2.0: A McKinsey Global Survey,” mckinseyquarterly.com, March 2007; “Building the Web 2.0 Enterprise: McKinsey Global Survey Results,” mckinseyquarterly.com, July 2008; “How companies
are benefiting from Web 2.0: McKinsey Global Survey Results,” mckinseyquarterly
.com, September 2009;
and Michael Chui, Andy Miller, and Roger P. Roberts, “Six ways to make Web 2.0 work,” mckinseyquarterly.com, February 2009.
3
Facebook. Recently, the technologies have been migrating into the enterprise, with the promise of creating new gains to augment those generated
by the earlier wave of IT adoptions.3 The patterns of adoption and diffusion for the social Web’s enterprise applications appear to resemble those of earlier eras: a classic S-curve, in which early adopters learn to use a new technology, and adop-
tion then picks up rapidly as others begin to recognize its value. The implications are far reach-
ing: in many industries, new competitive battle lines may form between companies that use the Web in sophisticated ways and companies that feel uncomfortable with new Web-inspired manage-ment styles or simply can’t execute at a sufficiently high level (see sidebar, “Managing the Web-
based organization”).
The findings
Our annual surveys of Web 2.0 use in the enterprise provided the basis for the findings in this article. The present survey, our fourth, garnered responses from 3,249 executives across a range of regions, industries, and functional areas. Two-thirds of the respondents reported using Web 2.0 in their organizations. As in past surveys, we asked respon-
dents about their patterns of Web 2.0 use, the measurable business benefits they derived from it, and the organizational impact of Web technol-ogies. We also inquired about the market position of the respondents’ companies, whether
their market share had changed, and how their operating margins compared with those of competitors in the same industries.
Web 2.0 technologies are now more
widely used
The share of companies where respondents report using Web 2.0 technologies continues to grow. Our research, for instance, shows significant increases in the percentage of companies using social networking (40 percent) and blogs (38 percent). Furthermore, our surveys show that the number of employees using the dozen Web 2.0 technologies continues to increase.4 Respondents at nearly half of the companies that use social networking
say, for example, that at least 51 percent of their employees use it. And in 2010, nearly two-
thirds of respondents at companies using Web 2.0 say they will increase future investments in
these technologies, compared with just over half
in 2009. The healthy spending plans during
both of these difficult years underscore the value companies expect to gain.
Among respondents at companies using Web 2.0,
a large majority continue to report that they
are receiving measurable business benefits—with nearly nine out of ten reporting at least one.
These benefits ranged from more effective market-ing to faster access to knowledge (Exhibit 1).
Toward the networked enterprise
We analyzed the shared characteristics of groups
of organizations in our survey and clustered
them according to the magnitude of the business benefits respondents reported from the use
of Web 2.0 tools and technologies. Our analysis revealed striking differences.
Among respondents who say their companies are using Web 2.0, most (79 percent) achieved
a mean improvement of 5 percent or less across a range of business benefit metrics (Exhibit 2). Respondents at the companies in this group report the lowest percentages of usage among their employees, customers, and business partners;
say that Web 2.0 is less integrated into their employees’ day-to-day work than respondents at other companies do; and are least likely to
Takeaways
A new class of company is emerging that uses collaborative Web 2.0 tech-nologies to connect
its employees and to forge close networks with cus-tomers, business partners, and suppliers.
These networked enter-prises are becoming more competitive, showing improved performance in three areas: market
share gains, market leader-ship, and higher margins.
Intensive use of social technologies is central. But even more important, companies must adopt man-
agement innovations to realize a truly transforma-tional impact.
At leading companies, information flows are less likely to be hierarchical, allowing employees at lower levels to make decisions.
3 Andrew McAfee, Enterprise 2.0: New Collaborative Tools for Your Organization’s Toughest Challenges, Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press, 2009.
4 For more details, see “Business and Web 2.0: An interactive feature,” mckinseyquarterly.com, December 2010.
4
McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
% of respondents whose companies are achieving specified benefits from their use of Web 2.0 technologies1A majority of respondents say their companies enjoy measurable business benefits from using Web 2.0.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 1 of 31 Includes respondents who are using at least 1 Web 2.0 technology.Internal purposes, n = 1,598Customer-related purposes, n = 1,708Median improvement, %Working with external partners/suppliers, n = 1,088Increasing speed of access to knowledgeIncreasing speed of access to knowledge77Reducing communication costsReducing communication costs60Increasing employee satisfaction41Reducing time to market for products/services29Increasing number of successful innovations for new products or services28Decreasing travel costs44Reducing operational costs40Increasing revenue18Increasing speed of access to internal experts52301020202020101530Increasing effective-ness of marketing63AwarenessConsiderationConversionLoyaltyIncreasing customer satisfaction50Reducing travel costs2924Increasing number of successful innovations for new products/servicesReducing support costs35Reducing time to market for products/services2624Increasing revenueIncreasing revenueReducing marketing costs45201510101820151020101557Increasing speed of access to external experts53Increasing satisfaction of suppliers, partners, external experts38Reducing time to market for products/ services22Reducing supply chain costsReducing product- development costs22Reducing travel costs4028Increasing number of successful innovations for new products/services20164520152010152520151120
Exhibit 1
A majority of respondents say their companies enjoy measurable business benefits from using Web 2.0.
Respondents at half of the internally networked
organizations reported that Web 2.0 is integrated tightly
into their work flows.
5
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
report high levels of collaboration or information sharing across the organization. We call these companies, still learning the ropes of Web 2.0,
the “developing” group.
Three types of organizations, however, seem to have learned how to realize a much higher level of business benefits from their use of Web 2.0.
Internally networked organizations. Some companies are achieving benefits from using Web 2.0 primarily within their own corporate walls. The survey results indicate that companies in this group—13 percent of those using Web 2.0—derive substantial benefits from deploying these technologies in employee interactions. Respon-dents at such organizations report a higher percentage of employees using Web 2.0 than respondents at developing organizations do. Respondents at half of the internally networked organizations reported that Web 2.0 is inte-
grated tightly into their work flows, for example, compared with only 21 percent of respondents
at developing organizations. Web 2.0 also seems
to promote significantly more flexible processes
at internally networked organizations: respondents say that information is shared more readily and less hierarchically, collaboration across organiza-tional silos is more common, and tasks are
more often tackled in a project-based fashion.
Externally networked organizations. Other companies (5 percent of those deploying Web 2.0) achieved substantial benefits from interactions
that spread beyond corporate borders by using Web 2.0 technologies to interact with cus-
tomers and business partners, according to survey results. Executives at these organizations
reported larger percentages of their employees, customers, and partners using Web 2.0 than respondents at internally networked organizations did. But the responses suggest that the internal organizational processes of externally networked organizations are less fluid than those of
internally networked ones.
Fully networked enterprises. Finally, some companies use Web 2.0 in revolutionary ways. This elite group of organizations—3 percent of those
in our survey—derives very high levels of benefits from Web 2.0’s widespread use, involving employees, customers, and business partners, according to the survey. Respondents at these organizations reported higher levels of employee benefits than internally networked organiza-
tions did, as well as higher levels of customer and partner benefits than did externally networked organizations. In applying Web 2.0 technologies, fully networked enterprises seem to have
moved much further along the learning curve than other organizations have. The integration of
Web 2.0 into day-to-day activities is high, executives say, and they report that these technologies are promoting higher levels of collaboration by helping to break down organizational barriers that impede information flows.
Capturing competitive advantage
Executives at the more highly networked companies in our survey reported that they captured
a broad set of benefits from their Web investments.
A key question remained, however: do these benefits translate into fundamental performance improvements, measured by self-reported market share gains and higher profits?
We performed a series of statistical analyses to better understand the relationship between
our categories of networked organizations and three core self-reported performance metrics: market share gains, operating profits, and market leadership. Exhibit 3 shows the results.
6 McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
Market share gains reported by respondents were significantly correlated with fully networked
and externally networked organizations. This, we believe, is statistically significant evidence that technology-enabled collaboration with external stakeholders helps organizations gain market share from the competition. They do this, in our experience, by forging closer marketing relationships with customers and by involving them in customer support and product-development efforts. Respondents at companies
Managing the Web-based organization
Respondents report that a variety of organizational structures
and units manage Web 2.0. This year’s results show that
the IT department is most likely to oversee internal Web initiatives
(61 percent of respondents). For customer-facing initiatives,
74 percent of respondents say that oversight falls to the marketing department. For Web 2.0 initiatives involving external suppliers
and partners, roughly equal numbers of respondents cite the IT, marketing, and business-development functions. Financing
comes from a variety of places, including the IT function, central corporate sources, and discretionary funds at the business
unit level.
The social nature of most Web technologies, of course, opens companies to greater interaction with the outside world. To manage this change, a slim majority of respondents (51 percent) say
their companies have adopted formal social-media policies; com-
panies with higher levels of Web 2.0 adoption are likelier to have them. In most cases, only a few employees are authorized to speak on behalf of the company.that used Web 2.0 to collaborate across organizational silos and to share information more broadly also reported improved market shares.
The attainment of higher operating margins (again, self-reported) than competitors correlated
with a different set of factors: the ability to make decisions lower in the corporate hierarchy and
a willingness to allow the formation of working teams comprising both in-house employees
and individuals outside the organization. These findings suggest that Web technologies can underwrite a more agile organization where front-
line staff members make local decisions and companies are better at leveraging outside resources to raise productivity and to create more valuable products and services. The result, the survey suggests, is higher profits.
Market leadership, which we ascribed to those organizations where respondents reported a top ranking in industry market share, correlated positively with internally networked organizations that have high levels of organizational collab-oration. Self-reported market leadership
also, however, correlated negatively with externally networked organizations. We believe it is unlikely that better interactions with external stakeholders lead to a decline in market position. A more
likely explanation for the data is that market leaders use Web 2.0 to strengthen internal collaboration, seeking to enhance the organiza-tional resiliency required to maintain their leadership positions. Market challengers, by contrast, may be more focused on external
uses of Web 2.0 to win customers from
industry leaders.
Overall, we found that respondents at 27 percent
of the companies in our survey reported having both market share gains against their competitors
7
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
Different types of networked organizations achieve different benefits.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 2 of 31 Specifically, respondents who reported Web 2.0 being very or extremely integrated into employees’ day-to-day work activities.2Specifically, respondents who strongly agreed that these characteristics applied to their companies.Less networked, n = 1,711Organization type Internally networked, n = 287Externally networked, n = 100Fully networked, n = 76 Benefits, mean % improvementDegree of usageIntegration, % of respondents1Organizational impact, % of respondents2Employee benefit metricsCustomer benefit metricsPartner benefit metrics% of employees using Web 2.0% of customers using Web 2.0% of partners using Web 2.0Web 2.0 integrated into day-to-day workIncreased information sharingLess hierarchical information flowsCollaboration across organizational silosTasks tackled in project-based wayDecisions made lower in corporate hierarchyWork performed by mix of internal and external people854312121334217951051985049524253402414312110919595343475925151914151731246270554766493925412927
Exhibit 2
Different types of networked organizations achieve different benefits.
and higher profit margins. That kind of perfor-mance clearly makes these companies profit consolidators in their industries, with earnings growing faster than the rest. Highly net-
worked enterprises were 50 percent more likely
to fall in this high-performance group than
other organizations were. This finding suggests that the fully networked enterprise could
become the benchmark for more vigorous compe-tition in many industries.
Moreover, the benefits from the use of collaborative technologies at fully networked organizations appear to be multiplicative in nature: these enter-
prises seem to be “learning organizations,”
in which lessons from interacting with one set
8 McKinsey on Business Technology Number 22, Spring 2011
• Integrate the use of Web 2.0 into employees’ day-to-day work activities. This practice is the key success factor in all of our analyses, as
well as other research we have done. What’s in the work flow is what gets used by employees and what leads to benefits.
• Continue to drive adoption and usage. Benefits appear to be limited without a base level of adoption and usage. Respondents who reported the lowest levels of both also reported the lowest levels of benefits.
• Break down the barriers to organizational change. Fully networked organizations appear to have more fluid information flows, deploy
of stakeholders in turn improve the ability
to realize value in interactions with others. If this hypothesis is correct, competitive advantage at these companies will accelerate as network effects kick in, network connections become richer,
and learning cycles speed up.
Going forward
The imperative for business leaders is clear: falling behind in creating internal and external net-
works could be a critical mistake. Executives need to push their organizations toward becoming
fully networked enterprises. Our research suggests some specific steps:
Statistical analyses offer insight into the relationship between use of Web 2.0 tools and three core self-reported corporate- performance metrics.MoBT 2010Web 2.0Exhibit 3 of 3Web 2.0–related factors significantly correlated with corporate-performance metricsCorrelation coefficient(higher = greater correlation)P-value (less than 0.05 = statistically significant)1. Market share gains2. Operating margins compared with those of competitors3. Market leadership— ie, first in industry market shareExternally networked organizationFully networked organizationOrganizational collaboration: cooperation across organizational silos, more project-based handling of tasks, less hierarchical information flows, and increased information sharingExternally networked organizationInternally networked organizationOrganizational collaboration (see explanation above)Distributed decision making and work: decision-making power situated lower in corporate hierarchy, more working teams composed of employees and people outside organization .427.344.182–.362.075.077.065.001.019.011.038.008.029.026
Exhibit 3
Statistical analyses offer insight into the relationship between use of Web 2.0 tools and three core self-reported corporate-performance metrics.
9
The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday
The authors would like to acknowledge the important contributions of Angela Hung Byers and Martin Rouse.
Jacques Bughin (Jacques_Bughin@McKinsey.com) is a director in McKinsey’s Brussels office; Michael Chui (Michael_Chui@McKinsey.com), based in the San Francisco office, is a senior fellow of the McKinsey Global Institute. Copyright © 2011 McKinsey & Company. All rights reserved.
talent more flexibly to deal with problems, and allow employees lower in the corporate hierarchy to make decisions. Organizational collaboration is correlated with self-
reported market share gains; distributed decision making and work, with increased self-reported profitability.
• Apply Web 2.0 technologies to interactions with customers, business partners, and employees. External interactions are correlated with self-reported market share gains. So are internal organizational collaboration and flexibility,
and the benefits appear to be multiplicative. Fully networked organizations can achieve the
highest levels of self-reported benefits in all types of interactions.
Executive perspectives
We asked two executives about their views on the networked enterprise
and what comes next.
Jim Smith, Wells Fargo
Jim Smith is executive vice president and managing head of Internet Services Group at Wells Fargo, which began its online strategy 16 years ago. Today, the bank is moving forward using many elements of the networked enterprise—launching banking via mobile devices and deploying social technologies such as Twitter and blogs to forge broader relationships with its customers. Better data on consumers’ needs are helping the bank create higher-value services, and over time, Smith says, the goal is to involve a greater numbers of bankers in Web interactions. Visit “The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday,” on mckinseyquarterly.com, to listen to a podcast in which Smith discusses Wells Fargo’s Web strategy and the cultural changes it has wrought.
Robert Stephens, Best Buy
Robert Stephens is chief technology officer of the electronics retailer Best Buy and founder of Geek Squad, the company’s technical-services business. Stephens envisions social and mobile technologies as key tools to helping Best Buy become a vast knowledge network where customers would have access to employees worldwide, both to inform themselves about products and to find answers to problems. Creating a networked enterprise, Stephens believes, means that all employees—from the executive suite down to the store level—need to be committed users of emerging technologies. Above all, those who interact directly with customers need to be curious about what consumers really want. Visit “The rise of the networked enterprise: Web 2.0 finds its payday,” on mckinseyquarterly.com, to listen to a podcast in which Stephens discusses Best Buy’s initiatives and how the networked enterprise creates competitive advantage.
Monday, May 2, 2011
TOEFL-IBT-Introduction-13 slides/Part 2-14slides
http://www.slideboom.com/presentations/68279/43-TOEFL-n3-part1-Intro
http://www.slideboom.com/presentations/70890/44-TOEFL-n3-part2
Slide 1
Advanced English: TOEFL Information (part one of four)
Slide 2
Introductory Questions: What does TOEFL stand for? Why is it an important English test? What kinds of tests will be on the TOEFL? What kind of scoring is on the TOEFL? Can you take the TOEFL over the internet, on a computer or must you take a written exam?
Slide 3
Answers TOEFL stands for “Test of English as a Foreign Language.” It is an admission requirement for non-native English speakers for many English-speaking universities. There are three different ways to take the TOEFL: The iBT (Internet-Based Test), The PBT (Paper-Based Test), and The CBT (Computer-Based Test). Each test is about 4 hours long.
Slide 4
Answers (continued) The iBT, since 2005, has been the most popular format for TOEFL, including the following: Reading – 3 passages and 39 questions or 5 passages and 70 questions (60-100 minutes). Listening – 6 passages and 34 questions (50 minutes). Speaking – 6 tasks and 6 questions (20 minutes). Writing – 2 tasks and 2 questions (55 minutes). The scoring for the iBT is from 0-120 (with each section worth 30 points).
Slide 5
Answers (continued) The CBT is similar to the iBT in structure, although the names of each section are different as well as the scoring. Listening. Structure/Writing (combined). Reading. The CBT scoring is like the iBT, although it gauges the scores of each 30 point section into an overall 0-300 point final score, while the writing section is scaled from 1-6.
Slide 6
Answers (continued) The PBT is the least-commonly used test in the TOEFL, and it has some differences from the iBT and CBT tests: Listening. Structure. Reading. The Test of Written English. Scoring for the PBT is split into two parts. The first part is grouped into 3 subscores of the Listening, Structure and Reading sections, each ranging from 310-677 points, while the Test of Written English is scored separately, ranging from 1-6.
Slide 7
Video and Questions: Watch the video and answer the following questions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVMwb5lDzPw&feature=related What information does Steve give for younger students taking the TOEFL “Speaking” portion of the test? What is Steve’s second tip for the TOEFL “Speaking” section? Why do you think he gives this advice? Do you think Steve’s third tip is useful for TOEFL test-takers? Why or why not?
Slide 8
Test Tips: Written The Written part of the TOEFL is ranged from 1-6 points (1 being the lowest). Here are some basic tips to follow while preparing for the Written section: Make sure that you clearly understand what it is that you need to write before starting to write.
Slide 9
Test Tips: Written (continued) You should have at least 3 paragraphs in your essay: the introduction, the development, and the conclusion. All three of these sections must be clearly developed. In order to get a high score, you MUST have a good understanding of English grammar and punctuation.
Slide 10
Test Tips: Written (continued) Clarity is more important than faking “good” English. Never begin sentences with conjunctions (and, but, for, with, because, etc.). Use different kinds of grammatical structures (passive voice, conditional and complex sentences, etc.). Use specific examples and reasons to support your evidence.
Slide 11
Sample Written Questions Here are a few sample questions similar to the questions on TOEFL tests. Read them and just think about how you would respond to them:
Slide 12
Sample Written Questions If you could change one thing about your country, what would it be? Support your answers. Do you think art has an important impact on the lives of people? Why or why not?
Slide 13
Sample Written Questions (continued) If you could travel back in time, which period would you choose? Why? What do you think is more important in a person’s development: friends or family? Support your answers. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: technology has helped the world improve the quality of life. Support your answers.
****************************************************************************
Slide 1
Advanced English: TOEFL Part Two: The Reading Section
Slide 2
Introductory Questions What kinds of questions will be on the reading section of the TOEFL? How long is the reading section of the TOEFL? What should I study in order to prepare for the reading section of the TOEFL?
Slide 3
Answers There will be standard multiple choice, sentences that require the student to click on a phrase, word, or paragraph, and sentences that require the student to insert a sentence into its correct position in the paragraph.
Slide 4
Answers (continued) The reading section varies in length depending on the iBT or the PBT formats. It usually lasts about 60-100 minutes with 36-70 questions.
Slide 5
Answers (continued) Since the reading section of the test requires the student to have an understanding of English vocabulary and critical thinking, he or she should focus on having a broad range of English as well as advanced comprehension ability.
Slide 6
Video and Questions Watch the video and answer the following questions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTsE-LRSo_M
Slide 7
Video and Questions What did the boy’s brother want him to do? What does “paraphrase” mean? What was an example the boy uses in paraphrasing? What are some tips the girl gives for better paraphrasing techniques?
Slide 8
Exercise 1: Paraphrasing Read the following sentences and attempt to paraphrase each of them. Until recently, my mother had smoked 2 packs of cigarettes per day, but now since she has developed cancer, she quit smoking.
Slide 9
Paraphrasing (continued) The canine population has grown 39% since 25% of the shelters have been closed down over a 4 year period.
Slide 10
Sample Test: Reading courtesy of: http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.1488512ecfd5b8849a77b13bc3921509/?vgnextoid=eff32d3631df4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=07f17f95494f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD Here is a sample reading test that you might see on an actual TOEFL reading section. Answer the questions below (the answer key is at the end).
Slide 11
Sample Test: Reading The railroad was not the first institution to impose regularity on society, or to draw attention to the importance of precise timekeeping. For as long as merchants have set out their wares at daybreak and (5) communal festivities have been celebrated, people have been in rough agreement with their neighbors as to the time of day. The value of this tradition is today more apparent than ever. Were it not for public acceptance of a single yardstick of time, social life would be unbearably (10) chaotic: the massive daily transfers of goods, services, and information would proceed in fits and starts; the very fabric of modern society would begin to unravel.
Slide 12
Sample Test: Questions What is the main idea of the passage? In modern society we must make more time for our neighbors. The traditions of society are timeless. An accepted way of measuring time is essential for the smooth functioning of society. Society judges people by the time at which they conduct certain activities.
Slide 13
Sample Test: Questions 2. In line 7, “this tradition” refers to the practice of starting the business day at dawn friendly relations between neighbors the railroad’s reliance on time schedules people’s agreement on the measurement of time
Slide 14
Answer Key C D Can you explain your answers?
http://www.slideboom.com/presentations/70890/44-TOEFL-n3-part2
Slide 1
Advanced English: TOEFL Information (part one of four)
Slide 2
Introductory Questions: What does TOEFL stand for? Why is it an important English test? What kinds of tests will be on the TOEFL? What kind of scoring is on the TOEFL? Can you take the TOEFL over the internet, on a computer or must you take a written exam?
Slide 3
Answers TOEFL stands for “Test of English as a Foreign Language.” It is an admission requirement for non-native English speakers for many English-speaking universities. There are three different ways to take the TOEFL: The iBT (Internet-Based Test), The PBT (Paper-Based Test), and The CBT (Computer-Based Test). Each test is about 4 hours long.
Slide 4
Answers (continued) The iBT, since 2005, has been the most popular format for TOEFL, including the following: Reading – 3 passages and 39 questions or 5 passages and 70 questions (60-100 minutes). Listening – 6 passages and 34 questions (50 minutes). Speaking – 6 tasks and 6 questions (20 minutes). Writing – 2 tasks and 2 questions (55 minutes). The scoring for the iBT is from 0-120 (with each section worth 30 points).
Slide 5
Answers (continued) The CBT is similar to the iBT in structure, although the names of each section are different as well as the scoring. Listening. Structure/Writing (combined). Reading. The CBT scoring is like the iBT, although it gauges the scores of each 30 point section into an overall 0-300 point final score, while the writing section is scaled from 1-6.
Slide 6
Answers (continued) The PBT is the least-commonly used test in the TOEFL, and it has some differences from the iBT and CBT tests: Listening. Structure. Reading. The Test of Written English. Scoring for the PBT is split into two parts. The first part is grouped into 3 subscores of the Listening, Structure and Reading sections, each ranging from 310-677 points, while the Test of Written English is scored separately, ranging from 1-6.
Slide 7
Video and Questions: Watch the video and answer the following questions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVMwb5lDzPw&feature=related What information does Steve give for younger students taking the TOEFL “Speaking” portion of the test? What is Steve’s second tip for the TOEFL “Speaking” section? Why do you think he gives this advice? Do you think Steve’s third tip is useful for TOEFL test-takers? Why or why not?
Slide 8
Test Tips: Written The Written part of the TOEFL is ranged from 1-6 points (1 being the lowest). Here are some basic tips to follow while preparing for the Written section: Make sure that you clearly understand what it is that you need to write before starting to write.
Slide 9
Test Tips: Written (continued) You should have at least 3 paragraphs in your essay: the introduction, the development, and the conclusion. All three of these sections must be clearly developed. In order to get a high score, you MUST have a good understanding of English grammar and punctuation.
Slide 10
Test Tips: Written (continued) Clarity is more important than faking “good” English. Never begin sentences with conjunctions (and, but, for, with, because, etc.). Use different kinds of grammatical structures (passive voice, conditional and complex sentences, etc.). Use specific examples and reasons to support your evidence.
Slide 11
Sample Written Questions Here are a few sample questions similar to the questions on TOEFL tests. Read them and just think about how you would respond to them:
Slide 12
Sample Written Questions If you could change one thing about your country, what would it be? Support your answers. Do you think art has an important impact on the lives of people? Why or why not?
Slide 13
Sample Written Questions (continued) If you could travel back in time, which period would you choose? Why? What do you think is more important in a person’s development: friends or family? Support your answers. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: technology has helped the world improve the quality of life. Support your answers.
****************************************************************************
Slide 1
Advanced English: TOEFL Part Two: The Reading Section
Slide 2
Introductory Questions What kinds of questions will be on the reading section of the TOEFL? How long is the reading section of the TOEFL? What should I study in order to prepare for the reading section of the TOEFL?
Slide 3
Answers There will be standard multiple choice, sentences that require the student to click on a phrase, word, or paragraph, and sentences that require the student to insert a sentence into its correct position in the paragraph.
Slide 4
Answers (continued) The reading section varies in length depending on the iBT or the PBT formats. It usually lasts about 60-100 minutes with 36-70 questions.
Slide 5
Answers (continued) Since the reading section of the test requires the student to have an understanding of English vocabulary and critical thinking, he or she should focus on having a broad range of English as well as advanced comprehension ability.
Slide 6
Video and Questions Watch the video and answer the following questions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTsE-LRSo_M
Slide 7
Video and Questions What did the boy’s brother want him to do? What does “paraphrase” mean? What was an example the boy uses in paraphrasing? What are some tips the girl gives for better paraphrasing techniques?
Slide 8
Exercise 1: Paraphrasing Read the following sentences and attempt to paraphrase each of them. Until recently, my mother had smoked 2 packs of cigarettes per day, but now since she has developed cancer, she quit smoking.
Slide 9
Paraphrasing (continued) The canine population has grown 39% since 25% of the shelters have been closed down over a 4 year period.
Slide 10
Sample Test: Reading courtesy of: http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.1488512ecfd5b8849a77b13bc3921509/?vgnextoid=eff32d3631df4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=07f17f95494f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD Here is a sample reading test that you might see on an actual TOEFL reading section. Answer the questions below (the answer key is at the end).
Slide 11
Sample Test: Reading The railroad was not the first institution to impose regularity on society, or to draw attention to the importance of precise timekeeping. For as long as merchants have set out their wares at daybreak and (5) communal festivities have been celebrated, people have been in rough agreement with their neighbors as to the time of day. The value of this tradition is today more apparent than ever. Were it not for public acceptance of a single yardstick of time, social life would be unbearably (10) chaotic: the massive daily transfers of goods, services, and information would proceed in fits and starts; the very fabric of modern society would begin to unravel.
Slide 12
Sample Test: Questions What is the main idea of the passage? In modern society we must make more time for our neighbors. The traditions of society are timeless. An accepted way of measuring time is essential for the smooth functioning of society. Society judges people by the time at which they conduct certain activities.
Slide 13
Sample Test: Questions 2. In line 7, “this tradition” refers to the practice of starting the business day at dawn friendly relations between neighbors the railroad’s reliance on time schedules people’s agreement on the measurement of time
Slide 14
Answer Key C D Can you explain your answers?
Business E-Mail Writing-Tips 2011
SHOULD WE DITCH “DEAR…” FROM OUR E-MAILS?
By James Morgan BBC News
January 2011
Should e-mails open with Dear, Hi, or Hey?
It's time we ditched "Dear..." from work e-mails, according to a US political figure, who says it's too intimate. So what is the most appropriate way to greet someone in an e-mail - hi, hey or just get straight to the point?
Two words. That's all Giselle Barry needed to leave a lasting impression.
The spokeswoman for US congressman Ed Markey was e-mailing a group of reporters, to alert them to an important announcement.
"Hey, folks," she began.
Such a casual salute raised eyebrows at the Wall Street Journal, which interpreted the beginning of her e-mail as the end of a centuries-old written tradition.
"Across the internet the use of 'dear' is going the way of sealing wax," noted the newspaper.
"'Dear...' is a bit too intimate and connotes a personal relationship," Ms Barry told the paper. And as she strives to maintain what she calls "the utmost and highest level of professionalism", she sees no need for old-fashioned graces.
E-mail has changed the rules of engagement. The language of business is evolving. Our old "dears" are withering away, replaced in the top perch by "hello", "hi" and "hey".
And not everyone is quite so relaxed about this as Ms Barry.
"I'm fed up with people writing 'Hi Jean' when they've never met me," says etiquette guru Jean Broke-Smith.
"If you're sending a business e-mail you should begin 'Dear...' - like a letter. You are presenting yourself. Politeness and etiquette are essential.
"We are losing the art of letter writing. E-mails are becoming like texts. If we don't get a handle on it, future generations won't be able to spell at all."
But why are so many of us culling "Dear..." from our e-mails, even in the workplace? The simplest answer for its detractors is that it no longer says what it means, it feels cold and distant.
"The only time I write 'Dear...' is if I'm making a complaint," says Dan Germain, head of creative at Innocent smoothies. "If I'm writing to someone I am trying to impress, I would simply say 'Hello'. Losing 'Dear...' does not equal rudeness."
The word also implies being of a certain age, says Jon King, managing director of the digital marketing agency Story Worldwide, who adds: "I never use 'Dear...' It's old-dearish."
Mr King was the frontman in post-punk band the Gang of Four. His clients today include luxury brands like Faberge and Estee Lauder.
So how does he greet them? "Often with no intro line at all. I assume they know who they are, and cut to the chase."
It is this race to communicate that leaves old-school etiquette trailing in the wake, according to social behaviour expert Liz Brewer, star of ITV's Ladette to Lady.
"With social networking, we do everything in three seconds - reply, type, send - and often without due consideration," she explains.
"We have to remember that at the start of an e-mail we are sending a subtle message. If I write 'hi' to a person I don't know, I risk falling into a pit. I shouldn't presume I can be so familiar."
Introducing an e-mail is a lot like arriving at a party, she says. "Better to be overdressed. You can always take off the pearls."
As e-mail greetings go, "Hey folks" sure ain't pearls.
"Hey" sounds more like the brash, surfy American cousin of "hi". But is it really Bermuda shorts and bare feet?
That all depends on the recipient, says Anna Post, spokeswoman for the Emily Post Institute, which is based in Vermont and provides etiquette experts and advice to corporations in the US.
"'Hey' is a funny one. I never used to have a problem with it," she says. "Until I met the CEO of a young, hip company, who said she hated it. She said it sounds like a sharp jab. 'Hey!' Whereas to me, 'hey' sounds jaunty and uplifting."
And since we have no control over our e-mail recipient's perception, greetings like "hey" are not worth the risk in business, she adds.
"I would use 'Dear...' with people I don't know particularly well, because it corresponds to respect. I disagree with people who say 'Dear...' means 'you are particularly dear to me'. To convey that kind of 'Dear...' you need to write 'my dearest'."
But if introductions are a dilemma, sign-offs are a social networking minefield.
"Yours faithfully" can't be trusted. "Sincerely" feels insincere. And your "kindest regards" sound like anything but.
Liz Brewer believes you can never go wrong with 'best wishes'. "People put 'XX' all the time - and that's fine, but only if you would kiss the person in the street."
The trouble with sign-offs is you have so many options, says Anna Post. "It's the hottest question I get asked at my business comms classes. If it's business, I would stick to 'regards', 'kind regards' or 'best'.
"'Cheers' is too warm for some industries. But the one I really don't like is 'BR'. How could they be your 'best regards' if you couldn't even be bothered to type them out?"
The trick with sign-offs is to choose a phrase that's almost invisible, she says, because if the phrase looks odd "then people are no longer thinking about the content of your message", says Anna Post.
________________________________________
Dear James,
I'm fed up with people writing "Hi Jean" when they've never met me. Or putting "cheers" at the end of an e-mail. What is 'cheers'? Clinking a glass? It's an irrelevant word.
If you're sending a business e-mail you should begin "Dear..." - like a letter. You are presenting yourself. Politeness and etiquette are essential.
We're losing the art of letter writing. E-mails are becoming like texts - everyone is abbreviating. If we don't get a handle on it, future generations won't be able to spell at all.
I don't know you, so I'm not going to sign off "love" or "best wishes". And I'm banning the word "cheers".
Regards,
Jean Broke-Smith
Dan Germain Head of creative, Innocent
________________________________________
Hello James,
The only time I write "Dear..." is if I'm making a complaint. If I'm writing to someone I am trying to impress, I would simply say "hello". Losing "Dear" does not equal rudeness.
I work at Innocent smoothies, with a bunch of young 'uns. What I get from them in e-mails is "hi" and "hey" and the occasional "yo", but not often. Our smoothie marketing might have a casual tone of voice, but we're still a business.
Yes, we do use a conversational tone of voice on our packaging. You've already invited us into your fridge, so let's have a natter. But that for me is different to having a business conversation with an agency or a supplier.
In fact we have a policy about e-mails. "Don't write anything that could be misunderstood." Irony and sarcasm never work. And don't think that adding a smiley and three trillion exclamation marks will help. It just makes people think you're an idiot.
All the best,
Dan
Katie Craig English teacher
________________________________________
James!
It absolutely isn't weird to write "Dear..." at the start of an e-mail if that e-mail has replaced the function of letter-writing. So, my students' parents get a "Dear..." in the first couple of responses. Once we get to know each other, I take my lead from them.
The rule is, address your reader as you would in the context with which you are replacing the e-mail.
I find good friends often get no sort of greeting at all. Similar to the way, in life, we'd simply smile and resume the previous night's conversation.
With someone I haven't spoken to in a while, but am glad to, it tends to be their name and an exclamation mark, or, disgustingly, several (never let my pupils know this).
I think this makes sense - it's the lexical equivalent of running up to someone on the street and giving them a hug.
Let's meet soon,
Katie x
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:15
I sent my first email in 1984 (on a DEC VAX). The rule then was that the "to" line takes the place of "dear", so the body of the email has no salutation. The only time that "dear X" or even just the first line of the body starting with "X" was allowed, was when one is sending to several people and it was more polite to emphasize the distinction between recipient, and bystanders.
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:15
The only reason there's a debate about this is because many people cling to the belief that an email is like a letter. It is not. It depends on the recipient but if you're getting 20 emails a day from suppliers and need to negotiate back and forth, you do not have time to treat each reply as a letter. Googlemail has the right idea, grouping emails of the same subject into a 'Conversation'.
________________________________________
Final del formulario21st January 2011 - 23:06
I always start with their name, or if its a teacher or professor (I'm at university) I say Professor whomever.
Example:
Professor Windstein
Thanks again for whatever.
All the best/thanks again/ cheers/sincerely,
Me
Also, cheers is not shallow. It's a happier less drab way of saying thank you. I say it in everyday conversation, including professionals, and I see no problem using it in emails.
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:04
An American colleague emailed a UK colleague "My dearest ...." and both got terrific ribbing about it. We never did find out if it was meant as a joke, attempting to be very English or if he felt this conveyed greater respect in the office.
Final del formulario329. Claire Bear
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 19:17
many of my work colleagues, especially those in the states, don't bother with niceties such as dear, hi or hello - preferring to start them with my christian name. Personally I find this quite rude. I am in my 30s and guilty of using kind regards. Oh and another thing, if I read one more sentence that starts with "Because" I think I will pack up and go home. Don't they teach grammar in the US!
© 2011 by BBC News
By James Morgan BBC News
January 2011
Should e-mails open with Dear, Hi, or Hey?
It's time we ditched "Dear..." from work e-mails, according to a US political figure, who says it's too intimate. So what is the most appropriate way to greet someone in an e-mail - hi, hey or just get straight to the point?
Two words. That's all Giselle Barry needed to leave a lasting impression.
The spokeswoman for US congressman Ed Markey was e-mailing a group of reporters, to alert them to an important announcement.
"Hey, folks," she began.
Such a casual salute raised eyebrows at the Wall Street Journal, which interpreted the beginning of her e-mail as the end of a centuries-old written tradition.
"Across the internet the use of 'dear' is going the way of sealing wax," noted the newspaper.
"'Dear...' is a bit too intimate and connotes a personal relationship," Ms Barry told the paper. And as she strives to maintain what she calls "the utmost and highest level of professionalism", she sees no need for old-fashioned graces.
E-mail has changed the rules of engagement. The language of business is evolving. Our old "dears" are withering away, replaced in the top perch by "hello", "hi" and "hey".
And not everyone is quite so relaxed about this as Ms Barry.
"I'm fed up with people writing 'Hi Jean' when they've never met me," says etiquette guru Jean Broke-Smith.
"If you're sending a business e-mail you should begin 'Dear...' - like a letter. You are presenting yourself. Politeness and etiquette are essential.
"We are losing the art of letter writing. E-mails are becoming like texts. If we don't get a handle on it, future generations won't be able to spell at all."
But why are so many of us culling "Dear..." from our e-mails, even in the workplace? The simplest answer for its detractors is that it no longer says what it means, it feels cold and distant.
"The only time I write 'Dear...' is if I'm making a complaint," says Dan Germain, head of creative at Innocent smoothies. "If I'm writing to someone I am trying to impress, I would simply say 'Hello'. Losing 'Dear...' does not equal rudeness."
The word also implies being of a certain age, says Jon King, managing director of the digital marketing agency Story Worldwide, who adds: "I never use 'Dear...' It's old-dearish."
Mr King was the frontman in post-punk band the Gang of Four. His clients today include luxury brands like Faberge and Estee Lauder.
So how does he greet them? "Often with no intro line at all. I assume they know who they are, and cut to the chase."
It is this race to communicate that leaves old-school etiquette trailing in the wake, according to social behaviour expert Liz Brewer, star of ITV's Ladette to Lady.
"With social networking, we do everything in three seconds - reply, type, send - and often without due consideration," she explains.
"We have to remember that at the start of an e-mail we are sending a subtle message. If I write 'hi' to a person I don't know, I risk falling into a pit. I shouldn't presume I can be so familiar."
Introducing an e-mail is a lot like arriving at a party, she says. "Better to be overdressed. You can always take off the pearls."
As e-mail greetings go, "Hey folks" sure ain't pearls.
"Hey" sounds more like the brash, surfy American cousin of "hi". But is it really Bermuda shorts and bare feet?
That all depends on the recipient, says Anna Post, spokeswoman for the Emily Post Institute, which is based in Vermont and provides etiquette experts and advice to corporations in the US.
"'Hey' is a funny one. I never used to have a problem with it," she says. "Until I met the CEO of a young, hip company, who said she hated it. She said it sounds like a sharp jab. 'Hey!' Whereas to me, 'hey' sounds jaunty and uplifting."
And since we have no control over our e-mail recipient's perception, greetings like "hey" are not worth the risk in business, she adds.
"I would use 'Dear...' with people I don't know particularly well, because it corresponds to respect. I disagree with people who say 'Dear...' means 'you are particularly dear to me'. To convey that kind of 'Dear...' you need to write 'my dearest'."
But if introductions are a dilemma, sign-offs are a social networking minefield.
"Yours faithfully" can't be trusted. "Sincerely" feels insincere. And your "kindest regards" sound like anything but.
Liz Brewer believes you can never go wrong with 'best wishes'. "People put 'XX' all the time - and that's fine, but only if you would kiss the person in the street."
The trouble with sign-offs is you have so many options, says Anna Post. "It's the hottest question I get asked at my business comms classes. If it's business, I would stick to 'regards', 'kind regards' or 'best'.
"'Cheers' is too warm for some industries. But the one I really don't like is 'BR'. How could they be your 'best regards' if you couldn't even be bothered to type them out?"
The trick with sign-offs is to choose a phrase that's almost invisible, she says, because if the phrase looks odd "then people are no longer thinking about the content of your message", says Anna Post.
________________________________________
Dear James,
I'm fed up with people writing "Hi Jean" when they've never met me. Or putting "cheers" at the end of an e-mail. What is 'cheers'? Clinking a glass? It's an irrelevant word.
If you're sending a business e-mail you should begin "Dear..." - like a letter. You are presenting yourself. Politeness and etiquette are essential.
We're losing the art of letter writing. E-mails are becoming like texts - everyone is abbreviating. If we don't get a handle on it, future generations won't be able to spell at all.
I don't know you, so I'm not going to sign off "love" or "best wishes". And I'm banning the word "cheers".
Regards,
Jean Broke-Smith
Dan Germain Head of creative, Innocent
________________________________________
Hello James,
The only time I write "Dear..." is if I'm making a complaint. If I'm writing to someone I am trying to impress, I would simply say "hello". Losing "Dear" does not equal rudeness.
I work at Innocent smoothies, with a bunch of young 'uns. What I get from them in e-mails is "hi" and "hey" and the occasional "yo", but not often. Our smoothie marketing might have a casual tone of voice, but we're still a business.
Yes, we do use a conversational tone of voice on our packaging. You've already invited us into your fridge, so let's have a natter. But that for me is different to having a business conversation with an agency or a supplier.
In fact we have a policy about e-mails. "Don't write anything that could be misunderstood." Irony and sarcasm never work. And don't think that adding a smiley and three trillion exclamation marks will help. It just makes people think you're an idiot.
All the best,
Dan
Katie Craig English teacher
________________________________________
James!
It absolutely isn't weird to write "Dear..." at the start of an e-mail if that e-mail has replaced the function of letter-writing. So, my students' parents get a "Dear..." in the first couple of responses. Once we get to know each other, I take my lead from them.
The rule is, address your reader as you would in the context with which you are replacing the e-mail.
I find good friends often get no sort of greeting at all. Similar to the way, in life, we'd simply smile and resume the previous night's conversation.
With someone I haven't spoken to in a while, but am glad to, it tends to be their name and an exclamation mark, or, disgustingly, several (never let my pupils know this).
I think this makes sense - it's the lexical equivalent of running up to someone on the street and giving them a hug.
Let's meet soon,
Katie x
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:15
I sent my first email in 1984 (on a DEC VAX). The rule then was that the "to" line takes the place of "dear", so the body of the email has no salutation. The only time that "dear X" or even just the first line of the body starting with "X" was allowed, was when one is sending to several people and it was more polite to emphasize the distinction between recipient, and bystanders.
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:15
The only reason there's a debate about this is because many people cling to the belief that an email is like a letter. It is not. It depends on the recipient but if you're getting 20 emails a day from suppliers and need to negotiate back and forth, you do not have time to treat each reply as a letter. Googlemail has the right idea, grouping emails of the same subject into a 'Conversation'.
________________________________________
Final del formulario21st January 2011 - 23:06
I always start with their name, or if its a teacher or professor (I'm at university) I say Professor whomever.
Example:
Professor Windstein
Thanks again for whatever.
All the best/thanks again/ cheers/sincerely,
Me
Also, cheers is not shallow. It's a happier less drab way of saying thank you. I say it in everyday conversation, including professionals, and I see no problem using it in emails.
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 23:04
An American colleague emailed a UK colleague "My dearest ...." and both got terrific ribbing about it. We never did find out if it was meant as a joke, attempting to be very English or if he felt this conveyed greater respect in the office.
Final del formulario329. Claire Bear
________________________________________
21st January 2011 - 19:17
many of my work colleagues, especially those in the states, don't bother with niceties such as dear, hi or hello - preferring to start them with my christian name. Personally I find this quite rude. I am in my 30s and guilty of using kind regards. Oh and another thing, if I read one more sentence that starts with "Because" I think I will pack up and go home. Don't they teach grammar in the US!
© 2011 by BBC News
Mc Kinsey Quarterly-Video Interview-EricSchmidt on Business Culture, Technology, and Social Issues
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Eric_Schmidt_on_business_culture_technology_and_social_issues_2796?pagenum=1#schmidt
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
GRACIAS, MESSI, EL ÚNICO
The following information is used for educational purposes only. https://youtu.be/Vo7htEsYT98?si=CXwieM1_6Rx2Q2yS ...
-
The following information is used for educational purposes only. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and the next generation Alex Cu...
-
The following information is used for educational purposes only. We the Future | September 2018 Michael Green: The global goals we´ve ...
-
The following information is used for educational purposes only. Aprender un nuevo idioma es bueno para el cerebro Los investigadores desc...
