Internet and children: can parents really be at ease?
The task
4 min 30 · no preparationVous allez exprimer votre point de vue de manière spontanée et continue pendant quatre minutes trente. Voici la question : de nos jours, est-il véritablement possible pour des parents de laisser leurs enfants utiliser Internet librement, sans avoir à s'inquiéter ? Développez votre opinion, justifiez-la et nuancez-la. Vous ne disposez d'aucun temps de préparation.
TCF Canada — expression orale — tâche 3
Translation of the prompt
ستُعبّر عن رأيك بشكل تلقائي ومتصل لمدة أربع دقائق وثلاثين ثانية. هذا هو السؤال: في عصرنا الحالي، هل يُمكن حقاً للوالدين أن يتركوا أطفالهم يستخدمون الإنترنت بحرية، دون أن يضطروا إلى القلق؟ طوّر رأيك، برّره ووازن بين جوانبه. لا يوجد لديك أي وقت للتحضير.
Translation of the prompt
Sie werden Ihre Meinung spontan und zusammenhängend während viereinhalb Minuten äußern. Hier ist die Frage: Ist es heutzutage für Eltern wirklich möglich, ihre Kinder das Internet frei nutzen zu lassen, ohne sich Sorgen machen zu müssen? Entwickeln Sie Ihre Meinung, begründen Sie sie und differenzieren Sie sie. Sie haben keine Vorbereitungszeit.
Translation of the prompt
You will express your point of view in a spontaneous and continuous manner for four minutes and thirty seconds. Here is the question: in today's world, is it truly possible for parents to let their children use the Internet freely, without having to worry? Develop your opinion, justify it, and add nuance to it. You have no preparation time.
Translation of the prompt
شما باید دیدگاه خود را بهصورت خودانگیخته و پیوسته به مدت چهار دقیقه و سی ثانیه بیان کنید. سؤال این است: آیا امروزه واقعاً ممکن است والدین اجازه دهند کودکانشان آزادانه از اینترنت استفاده کنند، بدون آنکه نگران باشند؟ نظر خود را بپرورانید، آن را توجیه کنید و ظرافتهای لازم را لحاظ کنید. هیچ زمانی برای آمادهسازی در اختیار ندارید.
Translation of the prompt
आप चार मिनट तीस सेकंड तक अपना दृष्टिकोण सहज और लगातार ढंग से व्यक्त करेंगे। सवाल यह है: आज के दौर में, क्या माता-पिता के लिए यह वाकई संभव है कि वे अपने बच्चों को बिना चिंता किए स्वतंत्र रूप से इंटरनेट इस्तेमाल करने दें? अपनी राय को विस्तार से बताएं, उसे उचित ठहराएं और उसमें बारीकियाँ जोड़ें। आपके पास तैयारी के लिए कोई समय नहीं है।
Translation of the prompt
Bạn sẽ trình bày quan điểm của mình một cách tự nhiên và liên tục trong bốn phút ba mươi giây. Đây là câu hỏi: ngày nay, liệu các bậc phụ huynh có thực sự có thể để con cái mình sử dụng Internet một cách tự do mà không phải lo lắng hay không? Hãy phát triển quan điểm của bạn, biện minh cho nó và làm rõ những sắc thái của nó. Bạn không có thời gian chuẩn bị.
Translation of the prompt
您将花四分三十分钟即兴、连续地表达您的观点。问题如下:如今,家长真的能够让孩子自由使用互联网而不必担心吗?请展开您的观点,加以论证并进行分寸上的调整。您没有任何准备时间。
How to structure your answer
Open with a balanced position: parental concern is understandable, but the goal is not zero worry — it is informed vigilance. Announce that you will look at both sides before proposing solutions.
Lay out the real, documented risks: inappropriate content, cyberbullying, screen addiction, and contact with predatory adults. Use concrete examples and show you take these dangers seriously.
Make the counter-argument: Internet is also an essential tool for a child's education, socialisation, and future career. Banning it entirely would do its own kind of harm.
Bring in nuance and solutions: parental controls, open dialogue, digital literacy education, and the importance of adjusting freedom to the child's age and maturity.
Close by restating your position clearly — not a ban, not blind trust, but progressive, informed supervision built on conversation and trust.
Model answer
about 524 wordsLa question de savoir si les parents peuvent vraiment laisser leurs enfants utiliser Internet sans s'inquiéter est au cœur des préoccupations de très nombreuses familles, au Canada comme partout dans le monde. Pour ma part, je pense qu'une inquiétude totale est aussi peu justifiée qu'une confiance totale. Ce qu'il faut, c'est quelque chose entre les deux : une vigilance éclairée.
Pour commencer, il faut reconnaître que les risques sont bien réels. Internet est un espace immense et largement incontrôlé. Les enfants peuvent y être exposés à des contenus qui ne leur sont absolument pas destinés : violence graphique, pornographie, discours haineux ou encore théories complotistes. À cela s'ajoute le cyberharcèlement, qui est devenu un phénomène alarmant chez les jeunes. Des adolescents sont ciblés via les réseaux sociaux, parfois avec des conséquences graves sur leur santé mentale, allant jusqu'à des situations de dépression ou d'isolement sévère. Il y a également le problème de l'addiction aux écrans, qui nuit au sommeil, à la concentration scolaire et au développement des relations sociales. Et puis, on ne peut ignorer le risque de contact avec des adultes malveillants qui utilisent certaines plateformes pour approcher des mineurs. Ces dangers sont documentés, ils sont réels, et aucun parent responsable ne peut les balayer d'un revers de main.
Cependant, interdire complètement Internet à un enfant aujourd'hui, c'est le priver d'un outil fondamental pour son développement. Internet offre un accès extraordinaire à des ressources éducatives de qualité, à des bibliothèques numériques, à des cours en ligne. Il permet aux enfants de rester en contact avec leurs proches et de développer des compétences numériques indispensables dans le monde professionnel actuel. Rappelons que les employeurs, au Canada comme ailleurs, attendent des jeunes qu'ils maîtrisent ces outils. Couper un enfant d'Internet de façon systématique pourrait l'exclure socialement et le mettre en retard sur ses pairs. Il ne s'agit donc pas de choisir entre Internet et la sécurité, mais de réfléchir à la manière de combiner les deux.
Et là, des solutions existent. Les logiciels de contrôle parental permettent de filtrer les contenus inadaptés et de fixer des plages horaires d'utilisation. Mais ces outils ne suffisent pas seuls : ce qui change vraiment les choses, c'est le dialogue. Un parent qui explique à son enfant pourquoi certains contenus sont dangereux, qui lui apprend à ne pas communiquer ses informations personnelles, à identifier les sources fiables, à signaler tout comportement suspect — ce parent-là donne à son enfant des clés pour se protéger lui-même. C'est cela, l'éducation numérique. Par ailleurs, la liberté accordée doit être proportionnelle à l'âge et à la maturité de l'enfant : ce qui est acceptable pour un adolescent de quinze ans ne l'est pas pour un enfant de huit ans.
En conclusion, je dirais qu'aucun parent ne peut, ni ne devrait, être totalement serein face à Internet. Cette inquiétude est saine, elle pousse à rester attentif. Mais elle ne doit pas déboucher sur une interdiction aveugle qui priverait l'enfant d'un outil précieux. La solution, c'est un encadrement progressif, fondé sur la confiance, le dialogue et l'éducation aux usages responsables du numérique. C'est ainsi que les enfants pourront profiter des richesses d'Internet tout en étant protégés de ses dangers.
Show the translation
The question of whether parents can really let their children use the Internet without worrying is central to the concerns of a great many families, in Canada as much as anywhere else in the world. For my part, I think that total anxiety is just as unjustified as total trust. What is needed is something in between: informed vigilance.
To begin with, we must acknowledge that the risks are very real. The Internet is a vast and largely unregulated space. Children can be exposed there to content that is absolutely not intended for them: graphic violence, pornography, hate speech, or conspiracy theories. Add to this cyberbullying, which has become an alarming phenomenon among young people. Teenagers are targeted through social networks, sometimes with serious consequences for their mental health, ranging all the way to depression or severe isolation. There is also the problem of screen addiction, which harms sleep, academic concentration, and the development of social relationships. And then, one cannot ignore the risk of contact with malicious adults who use certain platforms to approach minors. These dangers are documented, they are real, and no responsible parent can simply brush them aside.
However, banning the Internet completely for a child today means depriving them of a fundamental tool for their development. The Internet offers extraordinary access to high-quality educational resources, digital libraries, and online courses. It allows children to stay in touch with their loved ones and to develop digital skills that are indispensable in today's professional world. Let us remember that employers, in Canada as elsewhere, expect young people to master these tools. Cutting a child off from the Internet in a systematic way could exclude them socially and put them behind their peers. It is therefore not a matter of choosing between the Internet and safety, but of thinking about how to combine the two.
And here, solutions do exist. Parental control software makes it possible to filter unsuitable content and set time slots for use. But these tools are not enough on their own: what truly makes a difference is dialogue. A parent who explains to their child why certain content is dangerous, who teaches them not to share personal information, to identify reliable sources, to report any suspicious behaviour — that parent gives their child the keys to protect themselves. That is what digital literacy education means. Furthermore, the freedom granted must be proportional to the child's age and maturity: what is acceptable for a fifteen-year-old teenager is not acceptable for an eight-year-old child.
In conclusion, I would say that no parent can, or should, be completely at ease when it comes to the Internet. This concern is healthy — it encourages one to stay attentive. But it must not lead to a blanket ban that would deprive the child of a valuable tool. The solution is progressive supervision, based on trust, dialogue, and education in the responsible use of digital technology. That is how children will be able to enjoy the riches of the Internet while being protected from its dangers.
Key vocabulary
| Word or phrase | Meaning |
|---|---|
| une vigilance éclairée | informed, measured supervision — neither paranoid nor naive |
| le cyberharcèlement | cyberbullying — harassment carried out through digital means such as social media or messaging apps |
| l'addiction aux écrans | screen addiction — excessive dependence on phones, tablets, or computers at the expense of other activities |
| le contrôle parental | parental controls — technical tools that let parents filter content and set time limits on Internet use |
| les contenus inappropriés | inappropriate content — texts, images, or videos unsuitable for minors because of violence, sexual material, or other dangers |
| l'éducation numérique | digital literacy education — teaching children to use the Internet responsibly, critically, and safely |
| un adulte malveillant | a malicious adult — someone who intends to deceive or harm, especially by approaching minors on online platforms |
| des plages horaires | time slots — pre-defined windows during which an activity is allowed |
| un encadrement progressif | gradual supervision — oversight that relaxes over time as the child grows in maturity and independence |
| balayer d'un revers de main | to brush aside — to dismiss something without giving it serious consideration (formal, idiomatic expression) |
Common mistakes
'Laisser' (to let / to allow) is a causative verb. The infinitive that follows it comes directly, with no preposition in between.
Wronglaisser les enfants à utiliser Internet
Rightlaisser les enfants utiliser Internet
'Il faut que' triggers the subjunctive. The verb that follows must be in subjunctive mood, not the indicative present.
Wrongil faut que les parents sont vigilants
Rightil faut que les parents soient vigilants
Using 'normalement' as a logical connector is a very common calque from Arabic and many other languages. In French it means 'usually / under normal circumstances', not 'logically speaking'. Use 'en principe', 'logiquement', or 'il va de soi que' instead.
WrongNormalement, les parents devraient surveiller…
RightEn principe, les parents devraient surveiller…
'Internet' in French is masculine and is used without any article. Do not say 'la Internet', 'l'Internet', or 'dans Internet'.
Wrongnaviguer dans Internet / sur la Internet
Rightnaviguer sur Internet
Repeating 'il y a' to introduce every argument makes your speech monotonous and lowers your score. Vary your transitions with phrases like 'on constate que', 'à cela s'ajoute', 'vient ensuite le problème de', or 'on observe également'.
'Nuire' always requires a complement introduced by 'à'. You cannot use it as a transitive verb with a direct object.
Wrongl'addiction nuit le sommeil
Rightl'addiction nuit au sommeil
The grammar this task needs
Causative verbs (laisser, faire) + infinitive without a preposition
The question itself contains 'laisser leurs enfants utiliser Internet' — a structure you will naturally want to reuse in your answer. Adding a preposition before the infinitive is one of the most penalised errors on this topic.
- laisser les enfants utiliser Internet librement
- laisser un adolescent gérer son temps en ligne
- faire comprendre aux enfants les dangers du numérique
Subjunctive after impersonal expressions (il faut que, il est essentiel que, il est important que)
Giving recommendations and expressing necessity is central to this topic. These expressions are expected at C1 level, but the subjunctive that follows them is frequently wrong in the oral exam.
- il faut que les parents soient vigilants
- il est essentiel que l'enfant comprenne les risques
- il est important que le dialogue s'installe tôt
Concession structures (certes… mais, même si, bien que + subjunctive)
The task explicitly asks you to nuance your position. Examiners expect you to acknowledge the opposing side before defending your own — concession structures are the grammatical tool for doing this convincingly.
- Certes, Internet comporte des risques réels, mais il est aussi un outil précieux.
- Même si le contrôle parental est utile, il ne suffit pas seul.
- Bien que les dangers soient documentés, une interdiction totale n'est pas la solution.
Gender and article use with 'Internet'
Internet is masculine in French and is used without any article. Saying 'sur la Internet' or 'naviguer dans Internet' will immediately signal a lack of linguistic control to the examiner.
- naviguer sur Internet
- être connecté à Internet
- les dangers d'Internet
Phrases to reuse
| Phrase | When to use it |
|---|---|
| Ce qu'il faut, c'est une vigilance éclairée. | A strong, idiomatic way to introduce your central thesis using the 'ce que… c'est' cleft structure — sounds natural and confident in spoken French. |
| Il faut reconnaître que les risques sont bien réels. | Use this to acknowledge the opposing side fairly before you pivot — the word 'bien' adds weight without sounding alarmist. |
| À cela s'ajoute le problème de… | An elegant alternative to 'il y a aussi' when listing a second or third risk. Avoids the repetition that examiners penalise. |
| Interdire complètement Internet à un enfant, c'est le priver de… | Use this construction ('infinitive + c'est + infinitive') to show a logical consequence — it sounds polished and is easy to adapt. |
| Il ne s'agit donc pas de choisir entre X et Y, mais de réfléchir à la manière de combiner les deux. | Perfect for the nuance section: reframes the debate as a false dilemma and signals that you are moving towards a balanced solution. |
| Ce qui change vraiment les choses, c'est le dialogue. | The 'ce qui… c'est' cleft structure emphasises your key point effectively — a reliable way to stress the most important idea in a paragraph. |
| Ce parent-là donne à son enfant des clés pour se protéger lui-même. | Use 'ce… -là' (demonstrative + '-là') to refer back to a parent you have just described — creates a vivid, concrete image and sounds very natural. |
| La liberté accordée doit être proportionnelle à l'âge et à la maturité de l'enfant. | A precise, nuanced statement for the solutions section — the word 'proportionnelle' shows sophisticated vocabulary control. |
| Aucun parent ne peut, ni ne devrait, être totalement serein. | Opens the conclusion with authority. The 'ni… ne' double negation inside commas is a formal spoken register marker that impresses examiners. |
| C'est ainsi que les enfants pourront profiter des richesses d'Internet tout en étant protégés de ses dangers. | A well-balanced closing sentence — 'tout en + present participle' expresses two simultaneous ideas and is a strong marker of C1 fluency. |
| Des solutions existent. | A short, punchy sentence to open the solutions paragraph. Brevity here signals rhetorical control — you are signalling a turn in the argument. |
| On ne peut ignorer le risque de… | A more formal and varied way to introduce a danger, instead of repeating 'il y a' or 'il existe'. Keeps your language from sounding monotonous. |
Ideas bank
| Position | Argument | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Against (risks) | Exposure to harmful content | Children can easily encounter graphic violence, pornography, or hate speech — content that is entirely unregulated on many platforms. |
| Against (risks) | Cyberbullying and its impact on mental health | Teenagers are targeted via social media, sometimes with severe consequences such as depression or social withdrawal. |
| Against (risks) | Screen addiction undermining development | Excessive screen time disrupts sleep patterns, reduces concentration at school, and crowds out face-to-face social interaction. |
| Against (risks) | Contact with malicious adults | Some platforms are exploited by adults seeking to approach minors — a risk that parents often underestimate. |
| In favour (benefits) | Access to high-quality educational resources | Digital libraries, online courses and educational videos give children learning opportunities that go far beyond the classroom. |
| In favour (benefits) | Building essential digital skills for the future job market | Canadian employers expect young people to be digitally literate — a child cut off from the internet may fall behind their peers. |
| In favour (benefits) | Maintaining social connections | For children in rural areas or with relatives abroad, the internet is often the primary way to stay close to family and friends. |
| Nuance / solution | Parental controls as a first layer of protection — but not a complete solution on their own | Filtering software can block inappropriate content and set time limits, but a determined child will find workarounds unless dialogue accompanies the rules. |
| Nuance / solution | Digital literacy education as the most durable protection | Teaching children to verify sources, protect personal data and report suspicious behaviour gives them tools they carry throughout life. |
| Nuance / solution | Freedom should be proportional to age and maturity | What is reasonable for a fifteen-year-old is not appropriate for an eight-year-old — a graduated approach avoids both over-restriction and neglect. |
What the examiner looks for
The examiner is looking for a structured, continuous response that holds together for four and a half minutes without prompting — not a list of bullet points read aloud, but a coherent argument that builds. On this topic, what distinguishes a C1 candidate is the ability to genuinely nuance: acknowledging real risks without catastrophising, and proposing concrete solutions without being naively optimistic. Vocabulary range matters — an examiner will notice if you rely on 'il y a' for every point instead of varying with 'à cela s'ajoute', 'on constate que' or 'vient ensuite le problème de'. Grammatical control of the subjunctive after 'il faut que' and the correct use of causative 'laisser' without a preposition are both directly triggered by this question, so errors there will stand out. Finally, the examiner expects you to sound convinced: a flat, hesitant delivery — even with perfect grammar — will not reach C1.