Tuesday, February 07, 2017

IELTS Express Upper Intermediate Second Edition Unit 6 Listening p.62-65

(Supplementary Materials for Specific Textbooks--IELTS Express Upper Intermediate)

Treasure Hunt: drive, docs, pub
Slideshow for Treasure Hunt feedback: drive, slides, pub
Listening p.62-65 Powerpoint: drive, slides, pub
Transcript 6.4 & 6.5: drive, docs, pub
Transcript 6.7 & 6.8: drive, docs, pub
Transcript 6.9: drive, docs, pub
Transcript 6.10: drive, docs, pub
Transcript 6.11: drive, docs, pub

1. Listening section 3 is which type of dialogue: academic or everyday life?

2. How many people talk in listening section 3?

3. Usually, which type of people will talk in listening section 3?

4. In section 3, the questions may relate to ___________ rather than ____________.

5. In classification questions, there is only one answer to each question, but you may _________________________.

6. Note completion questions have to be completed using words from the recording.  Sentence completion questions are similar, but you should ensure that your answer is __________________.

7. Watch out for _______________!  The correct answer can come after the ____________.

8. TRUE or FALSE: For classification questions, you have to write the full answer.

9. Before you listen, first identify the ____________, then try to think of any ______________ and _______________.

10. TRUE or FALSE: the answers will not come close together, so after you here one answer, you can take some time to write it down without worrying about listening for the next answer.

Treasure Hunt  
The teacher has hidden 10 questions.  See if you can find and answer the questions.  The first team to finish will get a prize.
All the questions come from pages 62, 63, 64 and 65 of your textbook, so make sure you take your textbooks with you.  The answers to some questions may be the same.



3. ____________________________                                      _______________________________

4. _____________________________________________________________________________

5. _____________________________________________________________________________

6. . _____________________________________________________________________________

7. _______________________                                   ___________________________________

8. _____________________________________________________________________________

9. _______________                                ______________________                                 ___________________________

10. _____________________________________________________________________________
Answer key:      
1. academic
2. 2 or 3 people
3. students or students and a tutor
4. opinion, fact
5. use each answer more than once
6. grammatically correct
7. distractors, distractor
9. keywords, synonyms, paraphrases
D: Hi there, Alison.
A: Hello, Dave.  Long time, no see.  What’ve you been up to?
D: Oh, this and that.  Research mainly.
A: Researching what?
D: The WTO.
A: World Trade Organization.
D: Yes.  It’s all part of this project I’m doing on globalization.
A: Oh, yeah.  We did that last year.  What do you make of it then?
D: Well, it’s not exactly the most caring of organisations, is it?
A: What do you mean, Dave?
D: WTO rules favour the larger companies from wealthy countries.
A: In what way?
D: Well, by prohibiting protection through discriminatory tariffs, it’s hard for poor countries to build up domestic industries.
A: That may be the case.  But I’m sure that’s not a deliberate policy.  Anyway, you could argue that the rules laid down by the World Trade Organisation don’t exactly help smaller companies from the richer nations either.
D: Why not?
A: Well, many companies in wealthy countries, especially textile and clothing producers, oppose globalization because they can’t compete with cheaper imports made in countries with lower production costs.
D: Like China.
A: Exactly.
D: Ah.  And that’s another thing.
A: What is?
D: Democracy.  The WTO isn’t the most democratic of organisations, is it?
A: Why do you say that?  You know, all of the WTO’s rules have to be ratified by member states and all decisions are reached through consensus.
D: Yes, but all those decisions are made behind closed doors.
A: Maybe, Dave.  But I still believe that the WTO is a force for strengthening democracy throughout the world, as it encourages international trade and therefore the exchange of ideas and beliefs, including democracy.
D: I can’t see how you arrive at that conclusion, Alison.  No, if you ask me, it’s quite the opposite.  The WTO actually weakens the democratic process, because it allows the formation of enormous multinational organisations that are richer and more powerful than some countries.  And that can’t be good.  When it comes to global democracy, the WTO has a weakening effect.
A: I suppose you’re going to tell me that the WTO should regulate international companies over pollution next.
D: And so they should.  The WTO allows global companies to locate pollution-producing industries in poor countries.
A: This idea is nonsense, Dave.  Why would a company choose to relocate a whole plant to the other side of the world?  The cost would be enormous.  It would be much cheaper for the company to clean up the existing plant.
D: Maybe, but look at the extensive logging of the rainforests, Alison.  You must agree that the WTO should regulate that?
A: The WTO’s regulations allow for countries to protect such natural resources.  What does worry me is the way agricultural seed companies focus on high-yield, disease-resistant plants at the expense of other plants.  This policy is destroying plant biodiversity and that can only spell trouble.  No, these seed companies need regulating.
D: Well, at least we’re agreed on something.  Fancy a cup of coffee?
A: Only if it’s Fairtrade.
D: What?  In this place?  You’ll be lucky.  Come on…
K: OK, Peter, we need to decide about our presentation next week.
P: OK, Katya.  What do you think we should talk about?
K: Well, Dr. Chobham said to look at some of the factors that have contributed to the process of globalization.
P: Er, yes.   I was thinking maybe we could do something on the Internet.
K: Really?
P: Yeah, along with things like satellite TV and cheap flights, I’d say the Internet was really important in terms of globalisation.
K: I think you’ve got something there, Peter.  I mean anyone can get hold of all that information anywhere on the planet.
P: All you need is a computer, a modem and a phone line.
K: Precisely.
K: And apparently, I was reading, the Internet and mobile telephones allow developing countries to leapfrog steps in the development of their infrastructure.
P: What does that mean?
K: Well, for example, the Philippines has a poor landline telephone system, but with a mobile phone and computer, you don’t need to use it.
P: I don’t even know anyone here who uses a computer with their mobile!
K: But in my book, the Internet has moved far from its non-commercial roots.  When it was created it was meant to be a tool for people to communicate with each other.  These days it’s dominated by big business which is only interested in selling you yet more stuff, I get so much junk mail, and all these pop-ups!
P: Oh, that doesn’t bother me.  I rather like to know what’s on offer.
K: The Internet could also be seen as divisive.
P: In what way?
K: Well-off countries have much greater access to the Internet and communication services in general.  What we are witnessing is an information revolution and less well-off countries are getting left behind.
P: Up to a point.  Yes, not everyone has access to the Internet at home.  But many places have shared communal access—Some villages in Africa, for example.  But on the whole, it’s such a great way of exchanging ideas.
K: Ha! I think you’ll find it’s a one-way street.  The vast majority of websites are in English and western values dominate.
P: I know, I know.  You think it’s a kind of cultural imperialism.
K: I think that’s a fair assessment, don’t you?
P: I think you’re exaggerating the situation there, Katya.  For me, and millions of other people, it’s just an easy way of keeping in touch with family and friends, even when you are thousands of miles away.
K: Ah, that reminds me.  It’s my mum’s birthday today.  I forgot to send her a card!
P: Why not send her an electronic card?
K: Great idea!  Where would we be without the Internet?
T: Welcome back. I trust you had a good break and that you managed to read the books I recommended to you.  Any problems, Brad?
B: You know, I thought “Hands off the Planet” might be difficult to get hold of.  As it turned out, they had a whole stack of them in my local bookstore.  It was even on special offer.
J: Yeah, and you get a free password to enter a website dedicated to the book.
T: Really, Janet?
J: Yeah, I tried to take a look at it but the link wasn’t working.
T: Ah well, and what about Dr Jones’ book?
B: The bookstore said it was reprinting at the moment.  But in the end I managed to track down a copy in a second-hand bookshop.
T: Smart thinking there, Brad.  How about you, Janet?
J: Well, my brother had a copy so I just borrowed that.
T: Good, so what did you make of them?
B: I loved “Hands off the Planet,” it was such an easy read, unlike “The Future is Bright”.  I mean, it kept losing me, the argument just kept jumping around.
J: I know what you mean, it wasn’t helped by the fact that quite a few of the quotes in foreign languages were left untranslated, it’s as if we’re all expected to be multilingual!
T: Yes, I’m afraid that Dr Jones does like to show off his familiarity with different languages.  I’ll certainly make that point to him next time I see him.
J: But I think the main problem with Dr Jones’ book was that it assumed a previous knowledge of the subject.
B: Yeah, right.  There were some chapters where I felt way out of my depth.  I had no idea what he was talking about.
J: I had to get my brother to explain it to me!
B: I just didn’t feel Dr Jones’ book was very user-friendly.  Unlike “Hands off the Planet” it had no illustrations, and the section containing the extended interviews with all those foreign businessmen just went on and on.
J: Didn’t it just!
T: Well, it is a little on the long side, yes, but I think it remains a relevant and valuable resource, though on reflection it may have been a wiser option to have put these in the back of the book.
J: As an appendix?
T: Precisely.
T: So you preferred “Hands off the Planet”, did you, Brad?
B: Yeah, I thought it was really interesting.  Crilly obviously spent an awful lot of time preparing this book, all those amazing facts and figures.  The chapter on how cinema, TV and newspapers are becoming more global was really well researched.  In fact I was shocked to read just how powerful and influential some of these media corporations are.
J: Yes, though I thought at times the author just conveniently overlooked any data that didn’t support his argument.  It seemed to be quite biased, I thought.
B: That’s because he’s passionate about all this.  He’s very concerned about the future of the planet.
J: Well, that’s highly commendable, I’m sure.  But oversimplifying things to such an extent greatly distorts the true picture, and by adopting so radical a position he can actually put people off.
B: Yes, but he sees it as his mission to make people sit up and take notice.
J: Well, to be honest, I’m surprised we were asked to read this book at all.
T: Really, Janet?  What makes you say that?
J: It’s quite lightweight, isn’t it?  I’m not surprised they had so many in the bookshop.  I don’t know.  I just didn’t find the tone academic enough for serious study.
B: You mean you didn’t like the Captain Planet comic strips?  I thought they were hilarious!
J: Yes, I liked them.  They were quite amusing.  But I didn’t think that they were particularly appropriate for a serious subject such as globalization.
T: Hmm, I tend to agree with you there, Janet, but other students have read it in the past and most of them have been favourable towards it.
J: Another factor which I felt detracted from the academic nature of the book was that there was no index, whereas the one in Dr Jones’ book is excellent.
B: Ah yes, it was superb.  More than could be said for the bibliography in “Hands off the Planet”.  It’s virtually non-existent.
T: Well maybe there’s some more information on the website, if you can make it work that is.  OK, thank you for your comments.  All very interesting and most useful.  Now if we could just focus in on some of the ideas expressed in these books…
B: …especially with bananas and so on.
J: Oh, I know exactly what you mean.
T: OK.  Time for us to wrap up.  Now, I’d like you to write an essay.  The title is… “Globlisation: right or wrong?”
J: How many words?
T: One thousand, five hundred.
J: When is it for?
T: Where are we?  January 21st.  Shall we say in one week’s time?  The 28th?
B: Oh.  I’m not sure; we’ve got exams till the 26th.
T: Fine.  Let’s call it February the 2nd.  That will give you the weekend.
J: OK.  And do you want us to email it to you?
T: Best not to.  We’ve had a few problems with the system in the past.  No, pop it in the internal post.  Right, I’d better hurry.  I’ve got a lecture in five minutes; now where did I put my gloves?

No comments: