Modelo examen 7 – Listening

LISTENING PRACTICE TEST 7

 

 

Tienes 37 minutos para completar este ejercicio. El listening tiene una duración de aproximadamente 33 minutos y los restantes 4 minutos los puedes usar para revisar tus respuestas.

Si no quieres revisarlas, puedes pasar al siguiente ejercicio directamente.

 

 

EJERCICIO 1

You will hear six short, unfinished conversations. Choose the best reply to continue each conversation. Put a circle around the letter of the best reply. You will hear each conversation twice.

 

EJERCICIO 2

You will hear three conversations. Listen to the conversations and answer the questions. Put a circle around the letter of the correct answer. You will hear each conversation twice.

 

EJERCICIO 3

Listen to the person talking and complete the information on the notepad. Write short answers of 1 to 5 words. You will hear the person twice. You have a brief moment to look at the notepad

 

EJERCICIO 4

Listen to the conversation and answer the questions. Put a circle around the letter of the correct answer. You will see the conversation twice

 

Reproductor de audio

Solo tendrás una oportunidad para escuchar este audio. Asegúrate de que tienes el sonido activado y cuando estés preparado pulsa el botón de oportinidad 1 para empezar el audio. Cuando el audio termine, ya no tendrás más oportunidades de escucha. Suerte 😉

 

 

LanguageCert C1 Listening Model 7 Audioscript

 

 

Part 1: 

 

 

Number one:

  • Did you sleep well? 
  • Yeah kind of, I mean, I got off to sleep without any problem I was out like a light as soon as my head hit the pillow. 
 

Number two:

  • Sasha and Alex are getting married! 
  • Seriously? When did you hear that? 
  • Oh, I bumped into Alex on my way in this morning and he let it slip while we were chatting.

 

Number three:

  • Why did you buy three loaves? 
  • Oh, they were on special offer, three for two why not, eh?

 

Number four: 

  • Hey, who left the oven on? Ruth, was it you? 
  • Me? Why me? it’s got nothing to do with me!
  • Okay, I’m only asking. 

 

Number five: 

  • Hey, you’ve seen those new TVs? 
  • What? The fancy high-definition ones? 
  • Super high definition, 8K screen with built-in Surround Sound audio.
  • Are you thinking of getting one? 

 

Number six: 

  • So, how did you feel you did in the test? 
  • Well, not so well really, I think I failed. 
  • Well you got 60%, which is a pass, so well done!

 

 

Part 2

 

Conversation one: 

A: OK Jitesh, here’s the list of suggested changes from Head Office for the new year. We need to get back to them by Friday with our opinions on them. What do you think of the first one? 
J: I expect it’ll be very popular, and I think almost everyone will go along with it. People are certain to want to spend more time at home. 
A: I’m not sure. Of course people like working from home, but a lot of people like the atmosphere at the office, and find it hard to get motivated at home. I think it’s likely to come up against some resistance, especially if people are forced to work from home more. 
J: Ah yes, I see your point. Maybe we could make it optional? 
A: Yes, I think more people are likely to get on board with the idea that way. 
J: So, the next item on the list is this idea of closing the canteen. I don’t think people would be willing to accept that. 
A: Agreed. Let’s ditch that idea. 
J: OK, that was simple. What’s next? 
A: Ah, this idea of moving the line managers round. I think it’s a great idea. Not only will they gain a lot of useful experience, but the staff get to meet more people in the company and make new connections. 
J: Hmm, I can see it getting a lukewarm response, myself. People form relationships with who they work with, and don’t want to have that shaken up at regular intervals. 
A: Yes, but on the other hand, if you don’t get on with your boss you know they’ll be moving along soon. 
J: That’s true. OK, let’s implement it for a trial period of say, six months? Then we can reassess it later. 
A: Agreed.

 

Conversation two:

B: So, what can I do for you, Max?
M: Well, as you know, I’ve been here for a year now and I think I’ve settled into the job well over the last 12 months I’ve project managed several successful projects built successful relationships with existing clients and successfully attracted several substantial new clients to the firm all of these say they are very pleased with the service I’m providing them. 
B: Yes, and I’m extremely happy with your work here too, Max. You’ve become a very valuable member of the team. 
M: Good, I’m glad you think so, I appreciate that this might not be the right time but I wanted to look ahead to when you sit next year’s budget and ask whether there might be the possibility of a pay increase. I recognize that I’m still Junior in terms of length of service, however in terms of effectiveness and efficiency, I do believe that I’m as valuable as the other members of our team and therefore a pay rise is justified. 
B: You’re right, I think it’s something I should definitely look at and I’m glad you’ve come to me about it. I’ll take a look at our budgets next month and see what I can do as we move into the new financial year. 
M: That’s great! thanks, perhaps we can meet to discuss it again once you’ve done that. 
B: Sounds good, I’ll put something in my calendar as a reminder.

 

Conversation three:

Z: And next on the line we have Carl from Brentford. How can I help you, Carl? 
C: Oh hi, Zoe, thanks for taking my call. I have the most dreadful insomnia. I just can’t seem to get to sleep at night. Then I end up feeling really tired during the day. It’s so frustrating. 
Z: Oh dear, Carl. I’m sorry to hear that. Have you tried reading? 
C: I’ve tried everything, Zoe. Reading, having a bath and a cup of warm milk before bed, but none of it works. 
Z: Well, what do you think is stopping you from sleeping? Are you worried about anything? 
C: Nothing especially, but when I try to go to sleep I start thinking about things at work, in my life, and so on, and that makes me feel awake. 
Z: OK, here’s what I suggest. Seeing as none of the things you’ve tried seem to work, next time you’re lying there thinking about things and can’t sleep, I want you to get up. 
C: Get up? But why? 
Z: Well, my thinking is that you’re getting too caught up in your thoughts. Get up and do something. Maybe go for a short walk, pay a bill or something. It’s a distraction technique, doing something else will take your mind off the fact you can’t sleep. 
C: OK, thanks Zoe. I’ll give it a try.

 

 

Part 3:

OK, so the documentary is called No more girls and boys: can our kids go gender free? It shows how seven-year-olds are already forming strong ideas about the difference between boys and girls and their future roles, but – importantly – it also aims to reveal how these attitudes are formed and how they can be changed. 

 

Dr Abdelmoneim presents evidence from a brain expert who explains that there is basically no physical difference between the brains of boys and girls at this age. He adds that this is also true when it comes to strength: seven-yearold boys and girls have the same muscle mass. Yet when the kids’ attitudes are tested, they show major differences: boys have higher self-esteem and they judge their own intelligence more highly than girls do. On the other hand, boys score lower than the girls in terms of the vocabulary they use to describe their emotions – well, all emotions apart from anger, that is. 

 

Typically, girls use words connected with looks to talk about themselves: pretty, lipstick, dresses, ugly . . . but use words like football, in charge, strong and fighting to talk about boys. Abdelmoneim suggests that if there is no difference between girls and boys physically or mentally at this age, then these differences in attitude must come from the messages we pass on to kids. He gives the example of an experiment where carers choose ‘boys’’ toys such as cars and robots for a baby girl dressed as a boy and ‘girls’’ toys such as dolls for a baby boy dressed as a girl. 

 

Abdelmoneim goes on to explain how this kind of toy and activity selection for different genders impacts on kids’ achievements in areas such as Maths. Basically, boys typically do better in these areas because they get to practise these things more in their play. Abdelmoneim attempts to prove these points through a series of experiments carried out in a primary school class. These range from rearranging a coat cupboard which had been separated into girls and boys, to displaying ‘gender equal’ messages in the room such as ‘boys are sensitive’ and ‘girls are clever’, to giving girls and boys extra practice in areas that they are supposedly bad at. They also did a number of awareness-raising tasks to challenge their ideas. For example, the kids had to assess how they think they would do in a strength test and then compare this against how they actually performed. The girls saw both how they performed equally with the boys, and also got to notice how they undervalued themselves. At the end of the three-month experiment, the results showed improvements in all the areas first tested, compared to another class that didn’t take part in the experiments. 

 

So, that’s the outline. Now, turning to my own thoughts, I found the programme really fascinating. It made me think a lot about my own education and upbringing. Overall, I suppose the programme was more focused on boosting girls’ self-esteem, because it’s women who suffer inequality later in life, but what I liked most was that the experiment also benefited boys. I’ve since seen one of the mothers being interviewed and she commented on how her son was better behaved and nicer to his sister as a result of the changes at school. 

 

I suppose my main doubt about it is how far these ideas could be implemented in every school and every class and how far such changes would really change gender inequality at work if they were. For example, one task involved students meeting professionals who challenged the kids’ stereotypes – such as a female mechanic and a male make-up artist. How easy would that be to organise everywhere? And what happens in the next class they have? Do these attitudes last? 

 

I believe that to make a real difference, we need to train teachers and even structure schools differently. It’s not the easiest solution, but I believe radical thinking about how we treat girls and boys in the classroom is the only way to help change attitudes for good.

 

That’s basically all I have to say for the moment, but I’d like to open things out to the group now…

 

 

Part 4:

 

C: Hello! I’m Chris Hinds, and a very special welcome to this weeks’ episode of Work Junkie, the podcast all about current and future trends of work. This week I’m joined by Elaine Chorlton, who’s Dynamic Communications Orchestrator at one of the world’s leading tech firms, based in San Francisco. Welcome, Elaine, can I first ask you – what does your job title actually mean? 
E: Well, you know, I often get asked that. It basically means that I help the company with all aspects of communications, whether it be social media, going to the press, internal communications, that kind of thing. 
C: Right. So why such a fancy-sounding job title? Aren’t people likely to just get confused? 
E: Well, let me ask you this, Chris. What did you want to be as an adult when you were eight years old? 
C: Well, I really loved animals, and I was certain that I’d be a vet. But as I got older I actually wanted to be a teacher. 
E: OK, and now you’re a podcaster, right? 
C: Yes, that’s right. 
E: So my point is, when you were eight years old, did you know what a podcaster was? C: Well no, because they didn’t exist back then. 
E: Exactly. In the same way, it’s highly likely that the jobs our children will do in the future don’t exist yet. 
C: But aren’t a lot of these job titles now just fancy ways of saying the same thing? The other day I saw a job for a ‘Knowledge navigator’. I’m sure that a ‘Knowledge navigator’ is just a teacher. 
E: Well, yes and no. On the one hand, many new jobs just didn’t exist before, so they need new titles. This is especially true in the tech industry, where I work. You have new technology coming along all the time, which means a demand for new skills, like coding, maintaining a strong social media presence, that kind of thing. So these jobs will need new titles, new ways of describing working practices. In the future, as new innovations come along, we can be certain that this process will continue to evolve and render current ways of working obsolete, too. It’s a constant transformation. 
C: Right. 
E: Also, a lot of companies are finding it increasingly difficult to recruit graduates with the right skill set. It really is an employee’s market. So in a bid to attract the right kind of people, they’re coming up with increasingly dynamic titles to attract them. 
C: Like what?
E: Well, they change all the time, but some of my favourites from the last few years are: ninja, guru, magician and rockstar. 
C: Oh no, please! How are they used?
E: OK, so the first one is ‘Legal ninja’, which was advertised by a company in Palo Alto, California. They were looking for someone to provide legal advice on a range of issues. 
C: So, essentially, a lawyer? 
E: Well, yes, kind of. More a legal advisor, if you will. Next up is ‘Data guru’, a position advertised by a company in Michigan. They were looking for someone to ‘lead data activities’. 
C: Hmm, not quite sure what that means. 
E: Me neither, but it sounds fancy, right? For magician, we have ‘Full stack magician’, from a company in Atlanta. They were looking for someone to write code. 
C: Ah, OK. So a programmer then? 
E: Pretty much, but the job did involve analysing costs of different coding alternatives. But we can be pretty sure that the job didn’t involve any real magic, per se! 
C: Ha! So what about rockstar? Company musician? 
E: Alas, no. A New York based company advertised for ‘Rockstar copywriter’, which basically involves writing articles and social media posts discussing the industry, and putting the CEO’s name to them. 
C: So you’re unlikely to need to play the guitar then. 
E: Ha, not professionally, no. 
C: Well, thanks for joining us today, Elaine. One last thing, before you go, though. 
E: Sure. 
C: What did you want to be when you were eight years old? 
E: Oh that’s easy, I wanted to be a chocolate taster. 
C: Mmm, nice work if you can get it!
Please log in to join the chat