Listening Section 3: Multiple Choice & Matching: Question 6

Transcript-based practice (no audio).

Meera: So, did you get your draft essay back from Dr Whitfield yet? I picked mine up this morning and there's red pen absolutely everywhere.

Callum: Yeah, mine came back too. Honestly, I assumed the main problem would be that I hadn't cited enough sources. I only used about eight references for the whole thing. But that's not actually what she flagged at all.

Meera: Oh, really? What did she pick up on, then?

Callum: She said my thesis statement in the introduction was too broad. I'd basically written "remote work changes how teams function," which doesn't really commit to anything. She wants me to narrow it right down to one specific claim about creativity, since that's supposed to be the whole focus of the essay.

Meera: That makes sense, actually. Mine was almost the opposite problem. She said my thesis itself was fine (really precise, apparently) but my body paragraphs kept drifting away from it.

Callum: So your topic sentences weren't clear enough?

Meera: No, funnily enough, she'd ticked all of those and said they were strong. It's the middle of each paragraph where I lose the thread. I'll set up a clear claim and then just describe a study for three sentences without ever tying it back. She wants every paragraph to end with a sentence that explicitly links the evidence to my central argument.

Callum: Got it. Did she say anything about referencing?

Meera: Only a small thing. I'd mixed Harvard and footnote styles in a couple of places, which is an easy fix. The bigger shared issue, though, is our conclusions.

Callum: Mine basically just repeats the introduction word for word, doesn't it.

Meera: Same with mine. She wants an actual conclusion that spells out the implications of the argument, not a summary that just restates what we already said.

Callum: Fair. Did she mention the deadline at all? I was going to ask about an extension, given how much rewriting this needs.

Meera: I already asked. She said no extension for anyone, but she's opened up fifteen-minute consultation slots next week if we're still stuck after redrafting.

Callum: Okay, that's something. I think I'll try fixing the thesis statement on my own first, and only book a slot if I'm still not happy with it.

Meera: Probably wise. I'll do the same with my paragraph endings. Let's compare drafts again on Thursday, before we resubmit on Friday.

Callum: Sounds good. Same time as usual?

Meera: Yes, three o'clock in the library, like always.

Choose the correct letter, A, B or C.

1. According to Callum, what did Dr Whitfield actually identify as the main problem with his introduction? A. It did not cite enough sources. B. Its thesis statement was too broad and unfocused. C. It did not explain the background of remote work clearly enough.

2. What problem does Dr Whitfield identify in Meera's body paragraphs? A. Her topic sentences were unclear. B. Each paragraph lacks a specific illustrative example. C. The middle of each paragraph drifts away from her central claim.

3. What does Meera say about the referencing in her essay? A. She used the wrong system throughout the entire essay. B. She mixed Harvard and footnote styles in a couple of places. C. She forgot to include a reference list altogether.

4. What do both students agree is the shared problem with their conclusions? A. The conclusions simply restate the introduction instead of addressing implications. B. The conclusions are too short relative to the rest of the essay. C. The conclusions introduce new evidence not covered in the main body.

5. What does Dr Whitfield say when Callum considers asking for an extension? A. She refuses to extend the deadline but offers consultation slots instead. B. She grants a short extension to both students. C. She says a decision on extensions will be made closer to the deadline.

6. What does Callum decide to do before considering booking a consultation slot? A. Ask Meera to review his whole draft first. B. Book a slot with Dr Whitfield immediately. C. Try revising his thesis statement on his own first.