Skip to guide
CambridgePreparationAI home
English
Log inCreate free account

C1 Advanced · Reading & Use of English · Part 6

C1 Cross-text Multiple Matching Practice (Free)

Compare the views of four writers on a shared subject. Practise spotting agreement and disagreement when the writers express similar ideas differently.

Try the free exerciseCreate account for more practice

This exercise, its explanations and the downloadable PDF are in English.

Download exercise and explanations (PDF)
Free download · No account needed · 3 pages

What should recorded lectures change?

Compare the four writers' opinions. For each question choose A, B, C or D. Where the question says another writer, do not select the writer named in the question. Writers may be used more than once.

Original, independent teaching material. No account needed. The result counts correct answers in this sample, not exam marks.

A

The strongest case for recording lectures is that students can revisit a difficult explanation without asking everyone else to wait. I see recordings as a supplement to live lectures, not as a reason to abolish them. Following an argument as a lecturer develops it in front of an audience offers something different from assembling convenient fragments afterwards. Nevertheless, access to a recording does not itself make students abandon worthwhile face-to-face sessions; meetings that offer little additional value do that. Lecturers should ask what attendance provides before blaming technology for an empty room. Universities also have a responsibility to teach active viewing. Students benefit from being shown how to pause, attempt a problem and summarise an argument before replaying it. Simply providing a video assumes habits that not everyone has had a chance to develop. Training need not be elaborate, but it should be part of a course rather than advice students happen to encounter.

B

A recording can deliver an explanation at a time and pace that suits the learner. We should take advantage of that by moving lecture explanations onto video and using the scheduled hour for discussion, practical problems and feedback. Keeping the old lecture unchanged beside its recording misses the opportunity. I do not believe that the availability of recordings, by itself, discourages attendance at useful meetings. If students can gain nothing by coming, the meeting needs redesigning. However, there is a limit to what an institution should organise for them. Deciding how often to replay a section, when to make notes and how to fit viewing into a week are study habits that students should develop independently. Universities need not provide lessons in managing recordings. Clear academic expectations and well-designed resources are their responsibilities; converting every personal study decision into a taught procedure risks making learners unnecessarily dependent on institutional direction.

C

Live lectures and recordings serve different purposes, and I would retain both. A lecturer can notice puzzled faces and adjust an explanation before a misunderstanding spreads; a recording lets an individual revisit that explanation afterwards. The difficulty is that immediate convenience can outweigh a less obvious long-term benefit. Students may choose to stay at home because a video exists even when the live session would have been worth attending. That is not an argument for withdrawing access, which many students need. It is an argument for explicit guidance about how the two forms of learning fit together. Universities should teach students to plan viewing, take selective notes and identify questions to bring to class. Such instruction should explain the benefits of presence without pretending that everyone has identical circumstances. Flexible access and a meaningful shared timetable are compatible, but achieving that balance requires more than putting files online and waiting for good habits to emerge.

D

I would put the explanatory content of lectures on video and devote the released timetable space to workshops. Students could then arrive with initial questions, while staff could see how they apply ideas rather than merely whether they have heard them. This change would not remove the problem of non-attendance. The convenience of a recording can encourage students to miss useful face-to-face meetings, including the new workshops; access is therefore not entirely neutral in its effects. We should respond by showing students what they will gain from attending, rather than by making the recordings harder to obtain. Institutions should also offer practical instruction in using video materials and planning the work around them. That includes recognising when repeated watching is not producing understanding. Without such support, a system designed to increase flexibility can quietly leave students working alone more often than is helpful. Technology creates possibilities, but neither engagement nor independence follows automatically.

Four university teachers consider the role of recorded lectures.

1. Which other writer shares A's view that recordings do not themselves cause students to avoid worthwhile face-to-face sessions?
2. Which other writer agrees with B about replacing scheduled lectures with more active work?
3. Which writer differs from the other three on whether universities should teach students how to study with recordings?
4. Which writer shares D’s support for teaching viewing habits but differs from D on whether recordings themselves discourage attendance?

No account needed. You can check your answers as often as you like.

Answers and explanations

Read the reason behind each answer, then return to the text and find the evidence yourself.

Question 1: Reveal answer and explanation

Answer: B — Writer B

B agrees with A on the causal claim. A says access “does not itself make students abandon worthwhile” sessions; B says availability does not “by itself” discourage attendance at useful meetings. Both instead ask whether the meeting adds value. C and D explicitly allow recording convenience to reduce attendance even when a meeting is useful. A is the reference writer, so other excludes A.

Question 2: Reveal answer and explanation

Answer: D — Writer D

D agrees with B about replacing the lecture format: B would move explanations to video and use the hour for discussion and problems; D would use the released timetable for workshops. A and C explicitly retain live lectures alongside recordings. All writers see some value in recordings, but the question is about what happens to scheduled lectures, not whether video is useful.

Question 3: Reveal answer and explanation

Answer: B — Writer B

B is the exception. B calls playback, note-taking and scheduling habits students should develop independently and says universities need not teach them. A advocates active-viewing training, C explicit instruction in planning and notes, and D practical guidance. Do not confuse B's demand for good academic resources with support for institutionally taught viewing habits.

Question 4: Reveal answer and explanation

Answer: A — Writer A

A satisfies both conditions. Like D, A says universities should teach active viewing. Unlike D, who says recordings can encourage students to miss useful meetings, A denies that access itself makes students abandon worthwhile sessions. B also differs from D on attendance, but rejects institutional teaching of viewing habits. C supports teaching but agrees with D about the attendance risk. Compare both propositions, not just one shared opinion.

Ready for more C1 cross-text multiple matching practice?

Create a free account for more practice and saved progress. This sample and its explanations stay free to use.

Create free account

Already have an account? Log in to this activity.

Practice exercises are AI-generated and may contain errors. They are supplementary practice, not official exam materials.