Using personal memories · B2. Combine the actual clues without adding an unsupported fact. Keep the requested person, time, place or amount attached to the correct event. Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence.
Listen to the original English recording, answer the questions, then open the transcript to check the evidence. These related questions use the same recording; the level is an editorial guide, not a certified result.
Listen to the original English recording, answer the questions, then open the transcript to check the evidence. These related questions use the same recording; the level is an editorial guide, not a certified result.
Combine the actual clues without adding an unsupported fact. Keep the requested person, time, place or amount attached to the correct event. Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence.
The bag is wet and the umbrella is open: these are clues, not a complete history.
Use the reason actually given; a plausible reason from outside the text is not enough.
We meet inside because it is raining.
Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence. Ask what the person or message is trying to achieve, and for whom.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.
Listen to the original English recording, answer the questions, then open the transcript to check the evidence. These related questions use the same recording; the level is an editorial guide, not a certified result.
Listening carefully to memories
Combine the actual clues without adding an unsupported fact. Keep the requested person, time, place or amount attached to the correct event. Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence.
The bag is wet and the umbrella is open: these are clues, not a complete history.Use the reason actually given; a plausible reason from outside the text is not enough.
We meet inside because it is raining.Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence. Ask what the person or message is trying to achieve, and for whom.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.Keep your first attempt, check the evidence and try another question. A follow-up on the same material does not prove transfer to a new text.
No practice notes yet. Try a short warm-up.
Combine the actual clues without adding an unsupported fact. Keep the requested person, time, place or amount attached to the correct event. Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence.
The bag is wet and the umbrella is open: these are clues, not a complete history.Use the reason actually given; a plausible reason from outside the text is not enough.
We meet inside because it is raining.Separate supported claims from what the evidence leaves unknown. No mention does not prove absence. Ask what the person or message is trying to achieve, and for whom.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.Opening an answer records help for that question.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “What people considered important in their experience.”. Evidence: “How people remember an event may itself reveal what they considered important, even when the exact date needs checking.”. Compare the alternative “Only the sequence of external events after emotional connections have been removed.”. This makes one indicator sufficient on its own, although the passage calls for a broader assessment. Compare the alternative “The correct public chronology without checking other records.”. This claims more certainty or wider applicability than this evidence allows.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Its connection to a period of personal loss remained relevant.”. Evidence: “In her memory, the cinema belonged to the same period of loss as leaving the neighbourhood. That connection was relevant to the experience she was describing, although it was not evidence for the closure date.”. Compare the alternative “The project preferred her remembered date to the newspaper notice.”. This reverses the relationship stated in the passage. Compare the alternative “The project retained the closure date because personal memories should not be corrected.”. This extends a qualified finding into a claim without exceptions.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “No; space, relevance and consent still affect selection.”. Evidence: “This is not an invitation for us to promise that every account will be published in full. Space, relevance and consent still affect selection.”. Compare the alternative “Yes; approval of an extract commits the project to publishing the full interview.”. This claims more certainty or wider applicability than this evidence allows. Compare the alternative “Yes, provided the account agrees with the written chronology.”. This removes or changes a condition that limits the recommendation or claim.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Against a newspaper notice.”. Evidence: “A newspaper notice showed that the cinema actually closed two years later.”. Compare the alternative “By comparing which date most exhibition visitors remembered.”. This adds a specific detail that the account does not provide; plausibility is not textual evidence. Compare the alternative “By assuming it matched the family’s move.”. This reverses the relationship stated in the passage.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “It assumes an experience and encourages a positive response.”. Evidence: “Asking whether someone enjoyed the old market assumes an experience and points towards a positive answer.”. Compare the alternative “It removes the interviewer’s influence by using a familiar topic.”. This reverses the relationship stated in the passage. Compare the alternative “It leaves the participant free of any assumption about the experience.”. This reverses the relationship stated in the passage.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Show what different evidence can support and explain selection decisions.”. Evidence: “We want to show what different kinds of evidence can support, and to make the decisions involved in presenting them clear.”. Compare the alternative “Establish a single reliable chronology by accepting every remembered date.”. This claims more certainty or wider applicability than this evidence allows. Compare the alternative “Exclude disputed details so only fully verified experiences remain.”. This treats a limitation as a reason to discard the whole contribution, rather than distinguish its use from its limits.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Quietly changing the person’s quotation to fit a preferred account.”. Evidence: “We should not quietly alter a person’s quotation so that it appears to match our preferred version.”. Compare the alternative “Telling visitors how the memory differs from another source.”. This statement is consistent with the account. It is not the answer because the question asks for a claim rejected, avoided or not justified by the evidence. Compare the alternative “Checking factual dates against written records.”. This statement is consistent with the account. It is not the answer because the question asks for a claim rejected, avoided or not justified by the evidence.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “An open request to describe an ordinary visit.”. Evidence: “An open request to describe an ordinary visit leaves more room for an unexpected response.”. Compare the alternative “A request to confirm the interviewer’s positive view of the market.”. This reverses the relationship stated in the passage. Compare the alternative “A question asking the participant to fit the story to a written timeline.”. This removes or changes a condition that limits the recommendation or claim.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Before the interview.”. Evidence: “We tell participants about those limits before the interview”. Compare the alternative “After selection, when the participant first sees a proposed extract.”. This confuses two stages of the account: the initial situation and a later check or decision. Compare the alternative “Only after something sensitive has been shared.”. This confuses two stages of the account: the initial situation and a later check or decision.
Listening carefully to memories
The supported answer is “Beside other records, with explanations of their selection.”. Evidence: “The resulting exhibition will place short extracts beside other records, with enough explanation for visitors to understand why they were selected.”. Compare the alternative “As isolated dates without the personal circumstances that explain them.”. This makes one indicator sufficient on its own, although the passage calls for a broader assessment. Compare the alternative “As complete accounts intended to replace the written timeline.”. This extends a qualified finding into a claim without exceptions.