Durchgang 1
Blindes Hören
Verstehe die Hauptidee, das Thema und die wichtigsten Informationen ohne Untertitel.
🎧 IELTS Hören & Sprechen Übung
0:00 / 0:00
Fünf-Durchgänge-Hörmethode
Einen Hörinhalt in wiederverwendbaren Englisch-Input verwandeln
Höre nicht nur einmal. Teile dieselbe Episode in fünf Durchgänge auf: erst den Gesamtinhalt, dann Sprachhilfe, Shadowing, Diktat und zum Schluss ein erneutes Hören ohne Untertitel.
Durchgang 2
Englische Untertitel
Kläre unbekannte Wörter und schwierige Sätze. Nutze bei Bedarf ein Wörterbuch und kurze Notizen.
Durchgang 3
Shadowing
Sprich Satz für Satz nach und imitiere Aussprache, Rhythmus, Betonung und Intonation.
Durchgang 4
Diktat
Schreibe einige Schlüsselsätze aus dem Gehörten auf, um Form und Struktur zu trainieren.
Durchgang 5
Erneut ohne Untertitel hören
Höre noch einmal ohne Textunterstützung und achte darauf, was jetzt leichter und klarer ist.
Nach dem Training
Teilen und nacherzählen
Teile Notizen, neue Wörter oder einen nützlichen Begriff und erzähle die Episode dann mit eigenen Worten nach.
Nächster Schritt
Vom intensiven zum extensiven Hören
Nutze intensiv bearbeitete Episoden später als Hintergrundmaterial und erhöhe dein Hörvolumen mit vertrauten Inhalten.
Durchgang 1Durchgang 2Durchgang 3Durchgang 4Durchgang 5
📝 IELTS Speaking Dialog Transkript
I want to talk about whether universities should rescind honorary degrees and awards. Recently, students and alumni have called for institutions to rescind honours awarded to controversial figures. Some commentators argue that revoking an honour repairs a university's reputation. I am more cautious. I will give three reasons why institutions should think twice before they take back an award. First, fairness. People change over time and judging past behaviour is complicated. Second, precedent. Rescinding one award can set a precedent that invites constant review. Third, practical difficulty. Records are messy and legal fights can follow. I mention a couple of high-profile cases from around 2015 that grabbed headlines and prompted demands. That detail is interesting but not decisive. We should be wary of a chilling effect, where future decisions are made to avoid criticism rather than for academic merit. In short, I favour careful, case-by-case consideration. I do not suggest never rescinding. Nor do I suggest a rush to revoke honours to satisfy immediate public pressure. Institutions should weigh fairness, precedent, and practical consequences before they rescind an award.
📝 📚 IELTS Übungsfragen
1
What is the main topic of the passage?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
A
Erklärung:
Correct: The speaker explicitly discusses whether universities should rescind honorary degrees. B is related but too general—the passage focuses on rescinding, not improving reputation generally. C is incorrect because the passage addresses taking awards back, not how they are granted. D is wrong; student protests are mentioned but legal procedures for protests are not discussed.
2
How many reasons does the speaker give for being cautious about rescinding awards?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
C
Erklärung:
Correct: The speaker lists three reasons: fairness, precedent, and practical difficulty. A and B are wrong because more than one reason is given. D is incorrect because the speaker does not list four reasons.
3
Who does the speaker say often calls for institutions to rescind honours?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
A
Erklärung:
Correct: The passage states that 'students and alumni have called' for rescinding honours. B, C, and D are plausible groups but are not mentioned as the ones calling for rescinding in the passage.
4
Which negative outcome does the speaker warn about if institutions rush to rescind awards?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
A
Erklärung:
Correct: The speaker warns of a 'chilling effect' where future decisions avoid criticism rather than focus on merit. B is incorrect and not mentioned; financial gain is not discussed. C is wrong; the speaker does not claim rescinding improves standards. D is incorrect because the speaker actually mentions legal fights as a potential problem, not legal immunity.
5
What can be inferred about the speaker's overall position?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
C
Erklärung:
Correct: The speaker explicitly favours careful, case-by-case consideration and rejects both a rush to revoke and an absolute ban. A is wrong because the speaker is cautious, not absolutist. B is incorrect because the speaker says 'I do not suggest never rescinding.' D is wrong; the speaker criticizes decisions made to satisfy public pressure, not to gain publicity.
6
Why does the speaker mention the idea of 'precedent'?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
A
Erklärung:
Correct: The passage explains that rescinding one award can set a precedent that invites constant review. B is incorrect because the speaker treats precedent as a reason for caution, not an automatic improvement. C is wrong; the speaker does not claim legal binding. D is incorrect and contradicts the speaker's call for case-by-case consideration.
7
In this passage, what is the closest meaning of the word 'rescind'?
Falsche Antwort
Richtige Antwort:
A
Erklärung:
Correct: 'Rescind' is used to mean taking back or revoking an honorary degree. B is the opposite of rescind. C (postpone) is incorrect because rescind implies cancellation, not delay. D (strengthen) is unrelated to the meaning in context.
Hören in Sprechen verwandeln
Erhalten Sie sofortiges Feedback und tägliche Übung in der LexiTalk App.
App herunterladen