21 What did Chloe find most surprising about the initial field trip to the upper catchment?
A the lack of predictable geological patterns
B the varying sizes of the boulders
C the steepness of the terrain
22 When discussing the measurement techniques, Ethan suggests that they should
A rely mostly on traditional surveying tools.
B use drone mapping for the entire project.
C combine modern technology with manual sampling.
23 What problem did they encounter with the data from the mid-section meanders?
A The equipment malfunctioned.
B The numerical readings were inconsistent.
C They lost some of their field notes.
24 Regarding the final presentation, they agree to focus primarily on
A the impact of human intervention.
B the natural lifecycle of the channel.
C predicting future geological shifts.
Questions 25 to 30
What action will they take for each of the following sections of their report?
Choose SIX letters, A-G, and write them next to Questions 25-30.
Actions
A shorten it
B add more diagrams
C move it to an appendix
D rewrite it completely
E leave it unchanged
F merge it with another section
G check the academic references
Report Sections
25 Introduction
26 Methodology
27 Cross-sectional profiles
28 Longitudinal gradients
29 Human interference analysis
30 Conclusion
Keys
21 A
22 C
23 B
24 A
25 G
26 A
27 E
28 B
29 F
30 D
Transcripts
Part 3: You will hear two geography students discussing their river topography assignment.
ETHAN: Hi Chloe, thanks for meeting up. We need to sort out our river topography assignment before the weekend.
CHLOE: Hi Ethan. Yes, absolutely. I’ve been reviewing our notes from the initial field trip to the upper catchment area. Honestly, it wasn’t what I anticipated.
ETHAN: Really? Was it because the climb was too steep? I know that terrain was exhausting.
CHLOE: The physical effort was fine. And I expected the large boulders. But what really threw me was how the geological formations defied all the textbook models. I thought we’d see clear, predictable stepping, but it was entirely chaotic.
ETHAN: That’s a fair point. We should highlight that unpredictability. How are we writing up the measurement techniques we used? I thought we should use drone mapping next time.
CHLOE: Drones are great for broad surveys, but they can’t assess bedrock composition beneath the surface. Blending aerial scans with manual pebble counts was the most robust method. Let’s emphasize that dual approach.
ETHAN: You’re right. A hybrid strategy gives us the best data. But looking at the data from the mid-section meanders, I’m a bit worried. Did you notice the issues there?
CHLOE: Yes. I thought I had lost a page of field notes, but they were all there. The real issue is that the numerical readings for flow velocity fluctuate wildly. They just don’t align from one test to another.
ETHAN: I checked the gear and there was no malfunction; the instruments were perfectly calibrated. We’ll just have to explain the anomalous figures in our analysis.
CHLOE: Agreed. For the final presentation to the class, what should our main angle be? We could detail the natural lifecycle of the channel, from source to mouth.
ETHAN: Every other group will do that. Why don’t we pivot? We gathered great data on how recent construction projects altered the banks. Focusing on the effects of those artificial changes would stand out.
CHLOE: That’s a brilliant idea. Emphasizing the impact of human intervention gives us a unique thesis.
ETHAN: Okay, let’s look at the draft report structure to finalize actions. What about the Introduction?
CHLOE: It sets the scene well, but the background literature is dated. We need to verify that we are using the most current journal articles.
ETHAN: Good catch. I’ll update the academic references for that part. Moving on to the Methodology. I wrote this part, and looking back, I included way too much trivial detail.
CHLOE: I agree. It drags on. If we trim the excess words and condense the paragraphs, it will read much better. Let’s make it more concise.
ETHAN: I’ll shorten it this evening. Next is the section on Cross-sectional profiles. Are you happy with how that looks?
CHLOE: I reviewed it this morning. The data is presented logically and the formatting is clean. I don’t think we need to alter a word. Let’s leave it exactly as it is.
ETHAN: Perfect, that saves time. Now, the Longitudinal gradients section is quite dense. When I read through it, I struggled to visualize the changing elevations.
CHLOE: Yes, text alone isn’t enough. We need visual aids. If we insert a few clear graphs to illustrate the drop in elevation, it will make the concepts easier to grasp.
ETHAN: I’ll generate some visual representations and add them in. What about the Human interference analysis? We have good content, but it feels isolated sitting on its own.
CHLOE: I felt the same. Rather than keeping it as a standalone chapter, why don’t we integrate it directly into the main discussion section? It would flow much better if we unite the two.
ETHAN: That makes perfect sense. I’ll blend it in. Finally, the Conclusion. I tried tweaking the final paragraph, but it still feels weak.
CHLOE: Honestly, trying to fix it piece by piece isn’t working. We need a completely fresh perspective to summarize our findings properly. Let’s just discard the current draft and write a new one from scratch.
ETHAN: Sounds like a plan. I’ll open a blank document for it now.
