I. LISTENING (50 points) 🡪 2 pts. x 25 = 50 pts.

Part 1
1. Students’ Union
2. theft
3. (in a) cupboard
4. a valuables list
5. ultra violet pen
Part 2
6. D 7. 8. F 9. 10. C
H A
Part 3
11. B 12. 13. B 14. D 15. D
A
Part 4
16. elevated 21. plunder
17. for the voiceless 22. entitled
18. different causes 23. unmistakable
19. impunity 24. all sentient beings
20. egocentric 25. cancel each other out
worldview

II. LEXICO-GRAMMAR (20 points) 🡪 1 pt. x 20 = 20 pts.

Part 1
26. A 27. C 28. C 29. B 30. B 31. B 32. A 33. C
34. C 35. A 36. C 37. D 38. B 39. 40. A
D
Part 2
41.
0. evidence 42. laboriously
deleterious
43.
44. qualitative 45. misusing
acquisition

III. READING (50 points) 🡪 1 pt. x 50 = 50 pts.

Part 1
46. 47. temporary 48. risks/ 49. whether / if / when 50. emissions
though / faces
however
51. fully 52. earliest / first 53. what 54. up 55. if / once
Part 2
56. predators and 57. protective coloring 58. blend in
prey

59. alter their coloring 60. on many backgrounds 61. stripes or

spots
 62. color-blind 63. Countershading 64. black backs

65. TRUE 66. 67. FALSE 68. NOT GIVEN

TRUE
Part 3
69. E 70. G 71. 72. F 73. B 74. 75. H
A D
Part 4
76. 77. B 78. D 79. 80. A 81. C
C A
Part 5
82. A 83. E 84. B 85. D 86. A 87. C 88. C

93.
89. E 90. D 91. A 92. D 94. B 95. C
D

IV. WRITING (60 points)

Part 1. (15 points)
Contents (10 points)
 The summary MUST cover the following points:
 No conclusive proof of parents' influence on child's personality.
 New theory: peer influence stronger than parents'.
 Children use other children as models. Unhappy when not accepted by peers.
 Survey: more children blame peers than parents for unhappiness.
 Examples of parental influence not as strong: immigrants' children's' accents, children of deaf
mute parents, adopted children's behaviour.
 Children generally strong enough to survive in tough society.
 The summary MUST NOT contain personal opinions.
Language use (5 points)
The summary should:
 show attempts to convey the main ideas of the original text by means of paraphrasing (structural
and lexical use),
 demonstrate correct use of grammatical structures, vocabulary, & mechanics (spelling,
punctuations,...),
 maintain coherence, cohesion, and unity throughout (by means of linkers and transitional
devices).
Penalties
 A penalty of 1 point to 2 points will be given to personal opinions found in the summary.
 A penalty of 1 point to 2 points will be given to any summary with more than 30% of words
copied from the original.
 A penalty of 1 point will be given to any summary longer than 160 words or shorter than 120
words.

Model Answer 
Researchers do not have absolute proof that parents' upbringing shapes a child's personality. A new
theory states that a growing child is influenced more strongly by his peers than by his parents.
Children develop away from their parents towards their peers. They want to be like other children. If
they are rejected by their peers, they become miserable. One survey shows that more children blame
their peers than their parents for their unhappiness. Therefore parental influence is not as crucial as
previously believed. Examples are given of immigrants' children who do not speak with their parents'
accents and children of deaf mute parents who speak like other children. Adopted and natural born
children with a common upbringing have been observed to develop differently and many children
behave differently at home from when they are in school. Children can be strong. They can survive
parents' wrongs, peer challenges and adapt to the world outside. 
(153 words)
Part 2. (15 points)
Contents (10 points)
 The report MUST cover the following points:
 Introduce the charts (2 points) and state the striking features (2 points)
 Describe main features with relevant data from the charts and make relevant comparisons (6
points)
 The report MUST NOT contain personal opinions. (A penalty of 1 point to 2 points will be given to
personal opinions found in the answer.)

Language use (5 points)

The report should:
 demonstrate a wide variety of lexical and grammatical structures,
 have correct use of words (verb tenses, word forms, voice,...); and mechanics (spelling
punctuations,...).

Model Answer 
The pie chart illustrates the proportion of women in poverty by household composition in the United
States in 2010 and the bar graph indicates the differences in rates of poverty by sex and age. At first
glance it can be seen that single women with no dependent children made up the largest group in
poverty and that poverty was highest for women and children.
The pie chart shows that single women suffered from poverty the most. Single women without
children represented 54% of the total in poverty, and poverty for those with dependent children
stood at just over a quarter. Married women with and without children accounted for the remaining
fifth, or 20%.
Turning to the bar chart, poverty rates were highest amongst children, and the rates were roughly
equal for males and females, at around 21% for under 5s and 15% for 5-17 year olds. However,
from ages 18-24, the gap between men and women widened significantly, with approximately 14%
of men in poverty compared to over 20% for women. Poverty declined throughout the adult years for
both sexes, but a gap remained and this gap almost doubled in old age.
(192 words)
Part 3. (30 points)
The mark given to part 3 is based on the following criteria:
1. Task achievement (10 points)
a.    All requirements of the task are sufficiently addressed.
b.    Ideas are adequately supported and elaborated with relevant and reliable explanations,
examples, evidence, personal experience, etc.
2. Organization (10 points)
a.    Ideas are well organized and presented with coherence, cohesion, and unity.
b.    The essay is well-structured:
 Introduction is presented with a clear thesis statement introducing the points to be developed.
 Body paragraphs develop the points introduced with unity, coherence, and cohesion. Each
body paragraph must have a topic sentence and supporting details and examples when
necessary.
 Conclusion summarises the main points and offers personal opinions (prediction,
recommendation, consideration,...) on the issue.
 3. Language use (5 points)
a.    Demonstration of a variety of topic-related vocabulary
b.    Excellent use and control of grammatical structures
4. Punctuation, spelling, and handwriting (5 points)
a.    Correct punctuation and no spelling mistakes
b.    Legible handwriting

V. SPEAKING (20 points)

GRADING CRITERIA SCORE

Fluency and - presents fluently
4
Coherence - arranges information and ideas coherently
- covers all the requirements of the task with creative ideas
- supports and elaborates information and ideas adequately with
Content 6
relevant and reliable explanations, examples, evidence, personal
experience, etc.
- pronounces clearly and correctly with appropriate word /
Accuracy sentence stress and intonation 6
- uses a variety of topic-related vocabulary and complex structures
- speaks naturally and confidently
Presentation 4
- uses public speaking skill effectively
OVERALL SCORE 20
TRANSCRIPT
Part 1: A safety talk to new students at the University of Westley by a policeman.
Presenter
Good morning everyone and thank you for coming to this lecture on safety. This lecture is of course
optional for all students at Westley University but it has been laid on by your Students’ Union to
help you, and both the staff at Westley Police Station and the staff here at the University urge you
to attend the other lectures like it and also to get your friends to come too. So, that’s enough from
me. I would like to introduce you to Police Constable Fair from Westley Police Station who is going to
give you some hints on keeping safe. PC Fair.
PC Fair
Good morning ladies and gentlemen and thank you for allowing me to come here to talk to you. It
really is a great idea for someone from the police force to come and talk to you as it may save you
time, money and also it may help to protect you. I hope I don’t sound condescending when I point
out some ideas as a lot of things really are just common sense but it is often forgetting these
common sense things that can lead to problems.
First of all the thing that students are most likely to suffer from, whether they are in digs
or in hall, is theft. You hear a lot of terrible stories about muggings, rape and fraud but these are
not really that widespread and we’re talk about some of those things later. Thieves know very well
that student lodgings are a good place to fid electronic goods, wallets and bags and the like with little
or no protection. So, make sure that you’re room, house or flat is securely locked each time that you
go out. Don’t leave valuables in the open where they can be spotted from the window. See if you can
get an extra lock on your window too. If possible, when you’re out, try and leave your valuable
things in a cupboard which has an extra lock on it. So much for theft prevention. If you do get
burgled though there are ways to protect yourself here too. Try and get household insurance. Make
a valuables list of all the items that you own, including things like keys and bank cards,
estimate their value and take the list to any reputable high street insurance broker and
get a quote for household insurance. This is not very expensive and it will give you piece of mind.
Another thing you can do is to get an ultra violet pen and write your name and address
on all your valuables. This will not be able to be seen in normal light so your goods won’t look any
different but your goods will be forever marked as your property.

-7
N

Part 2: Five short extracts in which people are talking about the music industry.
Speaker 1 
Yes, I choose the acts myself. People send me recordings of themselves and I give them a listen and
decide whether they'd go down well here or not. We have a good crowd of regulars and I can tell
pretty well what they'll like and what they won’t. l think the artists who play here get a pretty good
deal. Of course, this industry is full of people who are on the make, and everyone knows
that artists get ripped off all the time. But l’m not like that, in fact I like to think l'm an exception
to that. l try to be fair to everyone. Of course, I have to be able to keep the place going and
make something for myself, but you don’t have to be dodgy to do that.
Speaker 2 
We get all kinds coming in here, from people who've got some chance of making it to absolute no-
hopers. What I've noticed is that you get two kinds of people – the ones who are doing it out of a
passion for music and the ones who are doing it because of what they think they can get out of it. Of
course, I tend to prefer the former, because they're only really interested in making good
music and l think that's how you should be. And it makes my job more interesting, because we
can discuss what sound they're trying to create and I can help them to achieve that. I do my best for
the others, too, because after all, they're paying as well. 
Speaker 3 
Of course, there are all sorts of stories and legends about people who do what I do, and how they
left the poor artist with no money and took it all themselves. In actual fact, I've never met anyone
who conforms to that stereotype. They're mostly people like me, who are in it because they enjoy it
and because they want the best for their artists. I think sometimes people exaggerate our influence –
sure, we can make sure our people get good contracts and the right amount of promotion, but in the
end I think the ones who make it to the top would do so anyway, regardless of who's
looking after them. You've either got that special something or you haven't – and if you
have, one way or another, you'll make it. 
Speaker 4 
Yeah, we started it up years ago and it’s really grown and grown. All sorts of people contribute to it
and some of them have been doing it for years. Of course, the public are very fickle and things
go in and out fashion very quickly. Today's big thing is soon forgotten, until people hear an old
song on the radio and get nostalgic about it. But our fans are very loyal and many of them have
grown up with the band. It's almost like a big family, and when the band goes on the road, they
often meet people who regularly write in. And they make suggestions about things we can include in
it, and I often act on those suggestions. 

Speaker 5 
Of course, I get to listen to all sorts of rubbish, although I always try to be fair. It frequently
astonishes me that some people who really aren't any good at all make it, and some
fantastically talented people remain obscure. That's the way the business works – the right
manager and you're in the public eye, whether you can play or sing or not. I try to do my bit for the
ones I think should make it – I give them five stars when their new record comes out, and I put in
glowing comments about them. I know it has some effect – people come up to me and say that, if
they hadn't seen what I said about so-and-so, they'd never have heard of them. 

Part 3: A discussion in which two marine biologists talk about an award-winning

television film they made about wildlife in Antarctica.
Interviewer:    Today, we’re taking to marine biologists Gina Kelso and Thomas Lundman, who you will recently
have seen in their award-winning TV series about Antarctica. So, Thomas, what’s it like to suddenly
become a household name?
Thomas:    Well, we’re being interviewed for all sorts of publications and programmes since our television series
about the wildlife on Antarctica won a major award. I’m often asked if I’ve always been interested in
marine wildlife, and I find that hard to answer. What about you, Gina?
Gina:    That’s an easy one for me, Thomas. I grew up on African shores, where my father worked for an
international company. I could swim by the age of four, snorkel at five. I guess I was destined for
marine biology because I’ve always been as happy in the water as on land. I remember a
particular evening when I was about eleven. It was dusk and I was snorkeling, and I
came across hundreds of stingrays entwined together. It was extraordinary; another
world, and that was the moment that decided me. Although I later went to school in the
middle of England, I’d lie awake at night dreaming of the ocean. Fortunately, I got into university to
do zoology and went on to do research in marine biology. 
Thomas:    And, like me, you’re been in wildlife filmmaking for how long… about eight years now?
Gina:    Yeah, I knew it was what I wanted to do, but instead of following the normal route of joining a TV
company as a researcher, I was lucky enough to be chosen to take part in that first wildlife
programme we did together. Do you remember?
Thomas:    Yeah, where we made the first ever live broadcast under the sea. The practice run was very
funny. I had to dive into a swimming pool and give a running commentary on some plastic plants that
had been borrowed from a studio to make it look more realistic. Fortunately, the programme itself
was a success and so one thing led to another after that, and we both moved more into the
production side. 
Gina:     And, it was tough making this latest series in Antarctica, wasn’t it?
Thomas:    Well, the series is introduced by a well-known naturalist, dressed in a thermal anorak with the hood
drawn so tightly that you can only see his nose.
Gina:    And you get an idea of what conditions were like, but he was only the presenter – flown in to do his bit a
flown back out again. We spent eight months there filming with a team of cameramen and
researchers, living on a specially adapted boat.
Thomas:    I didn’t think I’d stand a chance of working on the programme, because I imagined they’d
be looking for rugged types and I’m more the quiet academic. So I was quite taken aback
when they asked me. We went for spring and then returned the following spring, because the
winter would’ve been too cold. Even then, on the Antarctic peninsula it can drop to minus fifteen
degrees.
Gina:    We were involved mostly with the underwater scenes. It’s a lot of warmer in the sea, but we still had to
wear extra-thick wetsuits and thermal underwear. The thing about living in the remote research
community was I missed hanging out with my friends. 
Thomas:    But the Antarctic’s a place of incredible beauty and even after working sixteen-hour days, there were
still moments of peacefulness.
Gina:    But being with the animals for so long, we got to see things the other scientists hadn’t. One
guy’s been studying fur seals for years – knows everything about them – but he’s never
seen them eat. He was thrilled when we were able to tell him about it. And if we’d had
his input at the time, we would have realized the significance of what we’d seen and
focused more on it.
Thomas:    Absolutely. And the highlight of the trip was the day we entered a bay carved into huge glaciers to find
around forty humpback whales feeding. It was very quiet, and we heard a soft explosion. It was the
noise of the whales’ blowholes. What they do is dive down, and as they start to come up again they
release air bubbles from their blowholes. Then they swim round each other, trapping the krill they eat
in a curtain of bubbles. So it’s an extraordinarily effective piece of teamwork that really
increases their feeding efficiency. We filmed them for ten days because we wanted a shot of
them as they finished eating. We waited and waited and then one day they just suddenly stopped.
Interviewer:    And that’s……

Part 4. The speech by an Oscar 2020 winner, Joaquin Phoenix.

God, I'm full of so much gratitude right now. And I do not feel elevated above any of my
fellow nominees or anyone in this room because we share the same love, the love of film. And this
form of expression has given me the most extraordinary life. I don't know what I'd be without it. But
I think the greatest gift that it's given me, and many of us in this room, is the opportunity to use  our
voice for the voiceless.
I've been thinking a lot about some of the distressing issues that we are facing collectively. I
think at times we feel, or we're made to feel, that we champion different causes. But for me, I see
commonality. I think, whether we're talking about gender inequality or racism or queer rights or
indigenous rights or animal rights, we're talking about the fight against injustice. We're talking about
the fight against the belief that one nation, one people, one race, one gender or one species has the
right to dominate, control and use and exploit another with impunity.
I think that we've become very disconnected from the natural world, and many of us, what
we're guilty of is an egocentric world view – the belief that we're the center of the universe. We
go into the natural world, and we plunder it for its resources. We feel entitled to artificially
inseminate a cow, and when she gives birth, we steal her baby, even though her cries of anguish are
unmistakable. Then we take her milk that's intended for her calf, and we put it in our coffee and
our cereal. 
And I think we fear the idea of personal change because we think that we have to sacrifice
something, to give something up, but human beings, at our best, are so inventive and creative and
ingenious. And I think that when we use love and compassion as our guiding principles, we can
create, develop and implement systems of change that are beneficial to all sentient beings and to
the environment.
Now, I have been, I have been a scoundrel in my life. I've been selfish. I've been cruel at
times, hard to work with, and I'm grateful that so many of you in this room have given me a second
chance. And I think that's when we're at our best, when we support each other, not when we cancel
each other out for past mistakes, but when we help each other to grow, when we educate each
other, when we guide each other toward redemption. That is the best of humanity.
When he was 17, my brother wrote this lyric. He said, 'Run to the rescue with love, and
peace will follow.' Thank you.