TELC C1 Hörverstehen Teil 1 🎯 Intensiv-Training (mit Lösungen!)

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen It's the second Sunday again And instead of a video, today we're doing another beautiful livestream together You see the topic we are looking at today Let's specifically look at the first part of C1 Listening. That is usually the part where students have the most problems. Because this is not just about listening, but from my perspective, it's also very much about strategy. That means, what is the correct strategy? How can this task be approached strategically in order to have sufficient time and capacity to focus on listening? This means that, from my perspective, this task tests not only listening but also organization. And how to organize this best, I'll show you today I hope you can see and hear me well. It should all work out fine. Let's take a quick look at what the first part is actually about. How Listening Comprehension Part 1 Works This examination section is about global understanding. You are listening to an interview about a current topic from academic or scientific life. This is also TELC C1 for university, and TELC C1 General is the same thing. Only the topic is a bit different The listening tasks are the same, the writing tasks are the same, the reading tasks are the same Only when you take the TELC C1 Hochschule exam do you encounter topics that are a bit more specific to university studies. But the difficulty level and the way the tasks are structured are absolutely identical. You are listening to an interview on a current topic, and eight different people sequentially express their brief personal opinions on it. Your task on the worksheet is to match these 8 people with the appropriate statements. This means we have a total of 10 statements, A through J. There are 8 people; anyone who can calculate knows that two statements are entirely false. These serve as distractions. So that means one can quickly take a look at it You have here A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J There are 10 statements, but we are hearing only 8 texts. That means 2 of these statements do not apply to any person So, let's take a look at the most important tips The first tip: you have one minute to read through the statements. At this time, you absolutely must highlight key terms and do one more thing, which I will show you at the end. You must start immediately; one minute for ten sentences is not a lot of time. That means you have 6 seconds per sentence Word traps Also, the daily logs are naturally clever, especially the C1 ones. If the word "prohibition" appears in statement E, then at least one speaker will definitely say the word "prohibition" aloud in the audio. Yes, but this is no longer like A2 or B1, where you hear "prohibition" and the answer simply states "prohibition," and then yes, it must match. If it's that easy, it usually doesn't fit in C1 Maybe he says something else, for example, "I don't approve of bans." But the task says he finds bans super. That means, when you hear these big words like this and you also read them in the text Then it's usually a trap and it doesn't fit together Therefore, pay attention to synonyms You might not say "prohibited," but perhaps you would say, "Yes, I think it's good if it were allowed." First listen, then decide Actually, the point here is to say: don't decide too quickly. Because sometimes the opinion in the text is changed or additional information is provided Therefore, really try to listen to the text all the way to the end Of course, perhaps you can already mark one or two tasks during that time And then at the end, decide on one and then listen to the next task And that is also very important—have the courage to leave gaps and immediately move on. If you ever don't know a task And you might have an idea, that might be B and E Mark points B and E, write the number next to them corresponding to the speaker, and continue If you think too long now, you'll panic and unfortunately won't have enough time left to hear the next task Once you're out of rhythm, it's really difficult to get back in. That means it's also something you must train. If you don't know a task and perhaps only have an idea Mark the idea, and then at the very end, you make a decision. But as soon as the next speaker begins, you must focus on the next task and forget the previous one. Even if you haven't answered them yet Extremely, extremely important Then also use the exclusion principle If you already have an answer, and it's already gone, strike it through That makes a huge difference, because if you've already crossed off three and you hear the next task Then you already have much less to focus on If you don't strike them out, you might forget them Oh yes, I already knew it, then you read A again and that costs time once more Also absolutely not on the answer sheet, but on the problem sheet You can do whatever you want there. Strike the through If you're sure, okay, A is out, strike it through Also, as mentioned, this is also very much about organization here. And then, perhaps, the most important task Think about it—this is usually a controversial topic. We will soon see two, but let's take a very simple, controversial topic for now. For example, should alcohol be banned? Then, of course, there are people who say yes And then there are people who say no And you can relatively quickly hear in the texts whether someone is for or against it. That means my suggestion would be Let's do this together now When you read through the tasks, mark them right away Is the person for it or against it? We now have ten tasks. Let's say five are in favor and five are against. And you already hear it in the first ten seconds of the text Or within the first five seconds, that the person is suitable for it Then you just need to look at these five. And you can skip the other five Do you understand this? That is the absolutely most important tip I can give you for these tasks. We'll do this together right away, then you'll see it But again, so that you understand it When we have ten opinions and discuss a controversial topic Five people for it and five against it Take the example of alcohol And now I am a speaker, and I say Yes, I do think alcohol is very dangerous. There can be very many damages. Now you already hear that I am against it That means you now focus on these five, four, or five, or six answers This varies from task to task. Wherever the individuals are against it And where there are people for whom this applies, you can omit them Do you understand, that means you must The group you have to choose from will become smaller You no longer have to choose among ten sentences, but only five And that is much easier That is the best strategy I can give you here. Let's go through these tasks now and decide together. Also, this is about the topic of artificial intelligence and scientific writing. We have two tasks Let's do the first one together, just a bit. For the second one, I'll let you handle things a bit more on your own. Let's just take a look then It's about artificial intelligence and scientific writing. Probably it's about AI and university, homework How much AI should one use, and so on Written final theses should no longer count as independent assessment tasks in the future. That means, I would rather say that if we're talking about AI and scientific writing now This person is a bit against AI. Could one say Then, the assessment of written papers should be supplemented more by personal discussions or oral defenses. The person is probably also a bit against AI. Then, those who can afford better digital support can gain an unfair advantage in their studies. The person is also against AI Because she says, whoever has more money can afford better AI Who has better AI is unfair Then, digital tools can take over routine tasks, leaving more time for substantive work. That means the person says, no, AI can also be positive. Because she, let's say, takes care of unimportant tasks for me And then I can focus more on what's important Then, only a complete ban on AI can still prevent academic dishonesty. That is naturally against AI Programs can assist in formulating questions, but they cannot replace one's own scientific inquiry. I'd say that's also against AI Or perhaps a bit more neutral Who lets the writing process be completely taken care of for them loses an important part of their own thinking. Definitely also against AI Yes, here we can already see that the majority is against AI here. However, the reflective use of digital tools should be taught as an essential study skill. That means this person is saying there should perhaps even be a university major for it. Or a few extra courses where you learn how to work with AI That means this person is responsible for AI It is becoming increasingly difficult for instructors to assess students' actual performance. That is also against AI Universities should rely less on bans. And instead reconsider how scientific writing is taught Yes, I would also say that it's then rather positive Also it is definitely not negative That means we have here one, two, three opinions in favor of AI, one could say. Or those who have no problem with AI And we have seven opinions that have a problem with AI Now that we are listening to the first speaker And we hear that he is against AI Then we focus on the seven who are against AI When we hear the speaker and he is for AI Or not against AI Then we will focus on the three that are for AI Do you understand? Also in this case, it is 7.3 Sometimes it's 6.4 Sometimes it's 5.5 Regardless And just simply To make this a bit clearer And we also have a bit more overview Shall we do this together here? So That means, here we have the three who are in favor of it You obviously can't do that in the test. Because you can't re-sort this now I'm just doing this so we can read it a bit more easily. And now I'll just check how small I need to make this here That one can see them all at once This is also a bit of a problem with clarity here. I even have to make it a bit smaller there Yes, I think that's how it goes So one can read it fairly well like this I'm going to make myself a bit smaller Okay Now we'll listen to the first task. And let's try to decide very quickly Is the person for or against AI? Yes At the university If she is against it Let's see here, what opinion he says If he's in favor, we can take a look here Here there are only three options, after all. Okay Now we are hearing the first opinion Let's listen very briefly now Up to the point where one can say Whether the person is for or against it Yes Okay Then I'll say stop, and then we'll listen to it again I think we shouldn't pretend right now like that As if the classic thesis had already been completed Of course, these programs can formulate things impressively well. And sometimes they also provide a useful outline But that is not the essence of a scientific paper. What matters is whether someone develops an interesting question. To narrow down and justify a problem Why exactly this approach is sensible No program can really take that from you It can help with linguistic packaging. But not about what science is actually supposed to be about What are you saying here? Where would you look for the answer now? Here? Or here? By the way, I also have all the transcripts here You can also download them later yourselves Just like you can download everything yourselves I will also upload the audio files. You can look at all of that later then Okay Exactly, the person didn't speak positively about AI just now. That means, we are looking for the answer here Exactly So, let's take a look once again Let's listen again And now you know, we're looking for the answer here Then let's see where the correct answer is I think we shouldn't pretend right now As if the classic thesis had already been completed Of course, these programs can formulate things impressively well And sometimes they also provide a useful outline But that is not the essence of a scientific paper. What matters is whether someone develops an interesting question. Identify and justify a problem Why exactly this approach is sensible No program can really take that away from someone. It can help with linguistic packaging. But not about what science is actually supposed to be about So, what have you heard here? Which statement fits this person best? Which statement suits you best? Please write your answer options in the chat Hello, hello Who wants to, who wants to? I can already see a few correct answers Exactly F is also out Can we strike it through So, let's hear the next one And let's think again— is that positive or negative? I don't place much value on simply writing new blacklist lists right now. Then we'll just discuss what is allowed and what isn't And the real question remains unanswered Many students didn't really understand things even before AI. What good, scientific writing means You have gathered quotations, chained paragraphs together, and hoped That a piece of work emerges from it in the end We would have had to start much earlier How does one develop one's own research question? How do you check digital suggestions? And how does one make transparent which aids have been used? Was the person now more against AI or not against AI? Yes, exactly, the person wasn't against AI now. She hasn't said very much against AI lately. That means the answer is probably somewhere around here We'll listen again I don't think much of simply writing new prohibition lists right now. Then we'll just discuss what is allowed and what isn't And the real question remains unanswered Many students didn't really understand things even before AI. What good, scientific writing means You have gathered quotes, chained paragraphs together, and hoped That a piece of work emerges in the end We would have had to start much earlier How does one develop their own research question? How do you check digital suggestions? And how does one make transparent which aids have been used? And many have already written it in the chat Yes, I understand, that wasn't exactly super positive about AI just now. But he hasn't spoken against AI either. He has not criticized AI now Rather, he has criticized how scientific writing is generally taught at universities. That means exactly, J is out of here So, let's hear the next person? What worries me less is that a single sentence might have come from a program. What I find problematic is when the entire arduous process of writing disappears. When phrasing something, one often only realizes whether an idea truly holds up Or whether one has only roughly understood what it's about If you immediately have a finished text generated for you, you skip exactly this process. Then the work might look neat. But internally, much remains disordered. In the long run, one then stops thinking through complex relationships oneself. I believe it was fairly clear now that it was more directed against AI We'll listen once again, and please decide what the correct answer is here. What worries me less is that a single sentence might have come from a program What I find problematic is when the entire arduous journey of writing disappears. When phrasing something, one often only realizes whether an idea truly holds up Or whether one has only roughly understood what it's about If you immediately have a finished text generated, you skip exactly this process. Then the work might look neat. But internally, much remains disordered. In the long run, one then stops thinking through complex relationships oneself. Exactly, this clearly refers to task G, so it should also be removed. Let's listen to the next one Honestly, I also see the new programs as an opportunity. So, it's already quite clear regarding this person This is a very clear example of positivity. That means we can go down right away; let's just listen to it one more time now Honestly, I also see the new programs as an opportunity. Much of what consumes time when writing isn't particularly clever to begin with. Smooth phrasing, organize sections, collect initial literature references, or shorten a summary If such things happen more quickly, at best, more energy will be left for what truly matters. The argumentation, the selection of sources, and the question of what one actually wants to demonstrate Of course, one must not blindly accept whatever a program outputs. So, now you've just seen it, that was a perfect example right there. You may have also noticed that sometimes the plus-minus thing isn't really straightforward at all. Although I believe it's always a bit helpful, in this task it was extremely clear. If you've made a plus here, you know, okay, it can only come from those two now And then the task was super easy to solve. So, let's listen to the next one I think we're making it too easy on ourselves if we see AI merely as a threat to exams. In their later professional lives, many will inevitably have to work with such systems. Then it would make more sense to learn already during one's studies how to handle it critically and responsibly. What do you think—would you say the person is currently speaking positively or negatively about AI? Yes, rather positive, definitely not negative I think we're making it too easy on ourselves if we see AI merely as a threat to exams. In their later professional lives, many will inevitably have to work with such systems. Then it would make more sense to learn already during one's studies how to handle it critically and responsibly. That also includes recognizing boundaries. When is a suggestion helpful? When is he wrong, superficial, or manipulative? This skill has now become just as much a part of academic training for me. research, citation, or dealing with academic literature He basically says that one should already learn how to deal with AI during university. So this is not against AI, but rather for AI. That means H is out too Then we now have only A, B, C, E, and I left. That means there are now only 5 options left. There are still 2 tasks left. Did I forget one? 3, 4, 5 are out Did I perhaps forget number 4? Okay, it doesn't matter, we'll have to listen to that again too Now we'll listen to track number 7, 8 first I think I forgot number 4 But first we'll do 7 and 8, and then I'll do 4 again. We'll just listen to them one after the other now, and you can decide for yourselves. A complete ban may sound reassuring, but practically, I find it hardly enforceable. What concerns me more is the question of who actually benefits from these programs. Free versions often deliver only average results. while expensive offers make much more precise suggestions or even assist with style Students who already have better prerequisites They can then additionally purchase high-quality digital support. Others stick with weaker aids or don't even dare to use them. Thus, existing differences in studying could become even greater. From the instructors' perspective, the situation is quite uncomfortable. One receives a well-formulated paper, but one knows less and less how it came into being. Did the student work on it for a long time? Was it only corrected linguistically? Or does a large part originate from a system that no one discloses? The so-called recognition programs only help to a limited extent. because they make mistakes and ultimately fail to provide any evidence Thus, grading becomes less certain. One no longer judges a text merely, but must constantly think along. what proportion has actually arisen independently I don't think we should simply abolish written assignments. But alone they are increasingly insufficient as proof Previously, one could still relatively easily infer much from the style, from errors, or from the manner of argumentation. Today it is more difficult Therefore, I would find it meaningful to link the work more closely with conversation. When someone can explain their reasoning, address objections, and justify their decisions, One quickly notices whether there is truly a genuine understanding behind it. A brief defense would often reveal more than yet another plagiarism check So, that was just number 4 Okay, we can just do this again here, you can also do this at home Look at the solution key once again We had ended up with 7, 8, and then I did number 4. Also number 4 was just B, number 7 was C, and number 8 was J. Uh, sorry, I, not J Yes, you can also listen to it again at home if you like. So, that means A and E are not used I'll give you all of this, you can download everything at the first comment after the stream ends You can also read the transcript and so on, if you'd like So, now we will do an exercise together once again This time it's about attendance requirements at universities. Another topic where one can easily be for or against it And once again, let's read the tasks and see, whether the person is more inclined toward a mandatory attendance requirement. That means the students have to come to the university Or is he against a mandatory attendance requirement, and can one also do a lot online? In-person events also foster skills in interacting with others, which are important in later professional life. That means the person is clearly available for in-person events. This means that the students are supposed to come to the university. For many students, a certain external structure is helpful in order not to lose track during their studies. That means the person is also more inclined toward it Because this obligation to come to the university helps with organization Then, some learning processes only arise precisely because one must immediately respond to others' arguments. And I can only do that if I'm together with them That means, also for him Then, more flexible attendance rules particularly help students who have fixed commitments outside the university. That means the person is rather against it and says Yes, there are also people who have much else to do in life And for them, it would be better if one didn't have to come. After all, since students are adults, universities should原则上 dispense with any form of attendance monitoring. That means the person is also clearly against it. Then, if teaching predominantly takes place online, loneliness and psychological stress among students intensify. This means the person is subject to a presence requirement. Well, if there aren't any, then these problems just naturally arise. Loneliness, psychological stress, and so on Then, good teaching should be designed in such a way that students participate out of their own interest. This means that the person is actually rather against a mandatory attendance requirement. But she says that classes should be conducted in such a way that students want to come, not through obligation. Then, without rigid attendance requirements, students can better adapt their lives to their personal work style. So she is clearly against a mandatory attendance requirement as well. When hardly anyone is left on campus, a significant part of university life is lost. Clearly in favor of a mandatory attendance requirement And then, uniform attendance rules may disadvantage students whose health is not predictable from day to day. So she is against a mandatory attendance requirement. That means we'll sort this again and group together the positive and negative ones As I said, of course you can't do that in the exam, but we're just going to do it now anyway because we don't have enough space This time it is relatively well divided We have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, which are mandatory for attendance And we have 5 who are against a mandatory attendance requirement. I'll make these a bit smaller. That means we'll listen now, and this time we'll listen to it all the way through. I will, and as I said, this is not particularly realistic for the exam As soon as we find out whether the person is for or against it, I will either go to this group or to this group. Then you can directly type in the chat what this person says Okay, we start with 1 and then 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 One after another I always quickly show in the chat here whether it's 1 or 2 Then you can also write that in the chat What was that again? I think, if I make a sign like that, something comes or it used to be like that earlier? Regardless Then comes such an animation I think I could make some signs or symbols Then these animations came about Whatever, it doesn't matter either That's not really the point here, though. Okay, we're hearing it now too As I said, during the exam you must naturally do this all on your own. But if you've already indicated in the exam whether it's positive or negative Or whether the person, let's say, is in favor of or against it Then you can do the same thing. It's naturally not sorted as well as it is here Rather, you might have plus, plus, then minus, then plus, then minus, minus But you can still focus on those who are for or against it That means the strategy is the same But you unfortunately can't sort it as well as I can right here now But you see, if we do everything together, unfortunately there isn't enough space. That's simply too much space Also, we are now hearing one task after another I either go to the group that is against mandatory attendance Or to the group that is subject to a mandatory attendance requirement Depending on what the person says And exactly like that is how you should do it in the exam. Good, we're starting now We hear all eight one after the other I always give a sign One, two, three Maybe like that Four, five, six, seven, eight A bit heavy like this Somewhat like that It will work out, yes Okay, let's go Of course, I understand that recorded lectures are practical. That's especially advantageous when you're sick or want to catch up on something. Still, I would have stomachaches if that became the norm. A university is not just made up of content that can be accessed somewhere else Much happens between the events One gets into conversation with people Notice that others have the same questions Maybe find a study group Or stay briefly in the hallway after the seminar Although the substance would remain, everything else would disappear. But the shared life at the university is becoming quite meager. Of course, I understand that recorded lectures are practical. That's especially advantageous precisely when one is sick or wants to catch up on something. Still, I would have stomachaches if that became the norm. A university is not just made up of content that one can access somewhere else. Much happens between the events Sorry, I just had another idea We'll do it this way: we'll hear each task twice. And I'll do this once and that once, yes That doesn't work in the test either But then you might have a better idea, okay? Of course, I understand that recorded lectures are practical. This is especially advantageous precisely when one is sick or wants to catch up on something. Still, I would have stomachaches if that became the norm. A university is not just made up of content that can be accessed somewhere else Much happens between the events One gets into conversation with people Notice that others have the same questions Maybe find a study group Or please stay briefly in the hallway after the seminar Although the substance would remain, everything else would disappear. But the shared life at the university is becoming quite meager. I am not against presence But against the idea that everyone learns best at the same time and in the same place For me, for example, it's often the case that I can truly absorb complex content only in the evenings. Sometimes I'm physically present in a lecture, but I don't understand much. When I can pause a recording, rewind it, and watch certain sections again, I work much more focused. That has nothing to do with comfort for me, but rather with the fact that learning does not work at the same pace for every person. I am not against presence But against the idea that everyone learns best at the same time and in the same place For me, for example, it's often the case that I can truly absorb complicated content only in the evenings. Sometimes I'm physically present in a lecture, but I don't really understand much. When I can pause a recording, rewind it, and watch certain sections again, I work much more focused. That has nothing to do with comfort for me, but rather with the fact that learning does not work at the same pace for every person. In the discussion, it's often acted as if students had the entire day solely available for university. That's simply not true Many work 20 hours per week or more Others take care of children, parents, or other family members If then a seminar may only be attended at a specific time and missed sessions are strictly counted, enormous pressure arises. Of course, one shouldn't just disappear and do nothing at all. But more flexibility would particularly help those who take their studies seriously and still carry responsibilities outside campus. In the discussion, it's often acted as if students had the entire day solely available for university. That's simply not true Many work 20 hours per week or more Others take care of children, parents, or other relatives. If then a seminar may only be attended at a specific time and missed sessions are strictly counted, enormous pressure arises. Of course, one shouldn't just disappear and do nothing at all. But more flexibility would particularly help those who take their studies seriously and still carry responsibilities outside campus. I see the matter somewhat differently Many students overestimate how well they can organize themselves right at the beginning of their studies. This is not a question of intelligence, but of experience. Suddenly, there is no more timetable like in school No one reminds one daily about dues, and much of it initially appears voluntary. If regular participation is also missing, some will quickly lose track. A mandatory attendance policy is certainly not a perfect tool. But it can provide a kind of framework until one has learned to work independently. I see the matter somewhat differently Many students overestimate how well they can organize themselves right at the beginning of their studies. This is not a matter of intelligence, but of experience. Suddenly, there is no more timetable like in school No one reminds one daily about dues, and much of it initially appears voluntary. If regular participation is also lost, some will quickly lose track. A mandatory attendance policy is certainly not a perfect tool. But it can provide a kind of framework until one has learned to work independently. For me, it's not about whether one can also watch a lecture as a video. Partially, this may work in purely knowledge-based instruction. But in a good seminar, the crucial moment often arises spontaneously. Someone objects Another person provides an example. Suddenly one must formulate one's own position more precisely That's exactly how you know whether you've truly understood something. If everyone just uploads pre-prepared files or sits silently in a video conference, that friction is missing. Scientific thinking does not develop solely through consuming material, but through engagement with it. For me, it's not about whether one can also watch a lecture as a video. Partially, this may work in pure knowledge transmission An example from another person Suddenly one must formulate one's own position more precisely That's exactly how you know whether you've truly understood something. If everyone just uploads pre-prepared files or sits silently in a video conference, this friction is missing. Scientific thinking does not develop solely through Consuming material, but through engagement. For me, it never goes. I find that the debate is sometimes conducted from the wrong angle. When instructors especially discussing how to compel students to participate also says something about the event. Of course, there are always people who prefer to sleep in. But many still don't stay away just because they are fundamentally lazy, but because they perceive no added value in certain sessions. If a course is well prepared, offers room for participation, and clearly explains why presence truly matters Then most people will come voluntarily, requiring much less control. I find that the debate is sometimes conducted from the wrong angle. When instructors are faced with everything about how to compel students to participate also says something about the event. Of course, there are always people who prefer to sleep in. But many stay not because they are fundamentally lazy, but because in some meetings do not recognize any added value. If a course is well prepared and provides room for participation and clearly shows why presence truly makes a difference, much less control is needed. Then Most come voluntarily. As someone who supervises project seminars, I am cautious about abolishing the attendance requirement. It's not about adults how to treat schoolchildren. But certain things one does not learn by staying alone at home Task completed. In group projects, one must make agreements, find compromises, and give feedback. Enduring it and directly resolving conflicts when necessary—exactly that is uncomfortable, but important. Later in one's career, one cannot easily avoid such situations. When students By the end, they lack more than just professional knowledge, since they can hardly experience these things during their studies. As someone who supervises project seminars, I am cautious about abolishing the attendance requirement. It's not my intention to treat adults like schoolchildren. But certain You don't learn things by working on a task alone at home. In group projects, you must make agreements, find compromises, tolerate criticism, and even handle a conflict at times clarify directly. That is precisely what is uncomfortable, but important. Later in your career, you can avoid such not easily escape either. If students have hardly any such experiences during their studies not only do they lack expertise, but in the end, they are missing far more than just specialized knowledge. I wish for this topic more sensitivity. For some, presence is merely a matter of motivation, but for others it is not a daily obstacle. For example, someone who is chronically ill, experiences severe pain, or deals with Suffers from exhaustion episodes, cannot reliably plan on which days to go to the university is possible. This does not mean that these students want to achieve less. Often They work very disciplined indeed, just under different conditions. If rigid Absence regulations will then determine whether someone passes a course, a formal Equal treatment quickly becoming a real injustice. I wish for this Theme of greater sensitivity. For some, presence is merely a matter of motivation. for others, however, a daily obstacle. For example, someone who is chronically ill, experiencing severe pain Someone who lives with exhaustion episodes cannot reliably plan on which days the journey to is possible at the university. This does not mean that these students want to achieve less. Often They work very disciplined indeed, just under different conditions. If rigid Absence regulations will then determine whether someone passes a course, a formal Equal treatment quickly turning into real injustice. Okay, we've got this now heard it twice already. As I said, this won't be the case in the exam. You can only Once you've listened. You can also download all the transcripts. And here we have one more Once the solution. Task 1 I, 2 H, 3 D, 4 B, 5 C, 6 G, 7 A, and the last one was J. Marion, no, of course this doesn't consist solely of higher part 1, but rather of higher part 1, Most students have problems with this. That's why I thought we should practice it. Today, focused again. But we can also easily do another stream soon, if you'd like. We'll do the entire listening task C1 together. That's no problem. Okay, guys, That's it. I'll do this right now, so you can check this out here, I'll do this right now Once again, upload exactly as we have it here now, including all the audio files. And then you can you'd also like to do it again at home by yourselves. For example, on the laptop, you can Download the task. After that, you can read through the transcriptions. I'll do it then. Delete these lines. Then you can also do it calmly again at home. And you Also read the tips here. I will now prepare a nice PDF file and attach it. You'll find it right in the first comment. Alright, folks, that's it for today. I hope That has helped you a little. I would really recommend you to do it a bit more. train. And above all, this final tip here, marking pros and cons. That can really help you during the exam, because it removes a lot of stress and chaos. You have then immediately a structure that works very well. And when you hear the person is for it, whatever whenever the topic is this, you already know it can only be one of these five answers. And You no longer need to choose from eight answers or from ten answers. Clear? Yes, We'll definitely do it. Good, good, good, good. So, everyone, thank you so much for being here. Thank you. that you participated. Don't forget to leave a like and subscribe if you enjoyed this I like what I'm doing here. As always. To all members, see you next Saturday. And To all non-members, we'll see you again in two weeks for a live stream on YouTube. Next Sunday, a video will be coming out. All clear—have a nice Sunday, everyone. Take care and goodbye.