IELTS Listening 實戰 6 論文回饋對話（Part 3 風格）

Dr Chen (tutor): So Anna, I've had a chance to read your literature review draft. Before we dive in — how do you feel about it yourself?

Anna: Honestly, a bit worried. I spent a lot of time on the section about Piaget, but I'm not sure it connects to the rest.

Dr Chen: That's actually a fair self-assessment. The Piaget section is well-researched — no question — but you're right, it sits a bit apart from your central theme of digital learning environments. Let me be direct: I'd cut it by half.

Anna: By half? That's quite a lot. I was hoping to keep most of it, because it's foundational.

Dr Chen: Foundational, yes — but a literature review isn't an encyclopaedia. It should build towards your research question. What is your research question, by the way? It's not stated clearly until page seven.

Anna: Oh — I thought it was implicit in the introduction. I should state it upfront?

Dr Chen: Absolutely. On page one, ideally in the second paragraph. Markers shouldn't have to hunt for it.

Anna: Right, I'll move it up. What about the Vygotsky section? I felt that was stronger.

Dr Chen: The Vygotsky section is your best work in the draft. Genuinely. My only suggestion there is to add one more recent source — you've leaned heavily on the original 1978 text and one 2005 commentary. Is there anything from the last five years?

Anna: I came across a paper by Kim and Roberts, 2022, on Vygotskian frameworks in online classrooms. I didn't include it because I wasn't sure it was peer-reviewed.

Dr Chen: Kim and Roberts — yes, I know that paper. Published in the Journal of Learning Sciences, so definitely peer-reviewed. Do include it.

Anna: I will. One thing I'm struggling with is the structure. At the moment I've organised by theorist — Piaget, then Vygotsky, then Bruner. But I wonder if thematic would be clearer?

Dr Chen: That's a really good instinct. Organising by theme — say, cognitive development, social interaction, scaffolding — allows you to compare across theorists within each section. It also avoids the encyclopaedia feel we talked about.

Anna: So should I restructure entirely?

Dr Chen: I wouldn't redo everything overnight. But yes, over the next two weeks, rework it thematically. Keep your current draft as a backup file.

Anna: Got it. And the word count? I'm currently at eight thousand two hundred, the limit is seven thousand five hundred.

Dr Chen: You're seven hundred over. Cutting the Piaget section in half gets you most of the way. Be ruthless — any paragraph that doesn't serve your research question, delete it.

Anna: One last thing — when do you need the next draft?

Dr Chen: Let's say three weeks from today. That gives you time to restructure without rushing.

Anna: Perfect. Thank you, Dr Chen.

Questions 1-5 — Choose the correct letter, A, B, or C.

1. What is Anna's main concern about her literature review? A. It is too long. B. The Piaget section feels disconnected. C. It lacks recent sources.

2. Dr Chen's advice about the Piaget section is to A. remove it entirely. B. reduce it by 50 percent. C. move it to an appendix.

3. The research question should be stated A. on page one. B. on page seven. C. in the conclusion.

4. Regarding the Vygotsky section, Dr Chen thinks Anna should A. rewrite it completely. B. add a recent peer-reviewed source. C. reduce reliance on the 1978 original.

5. Dr Chen confirms that the Kim and Roberts paper is A. unreliable. B. peer-reviewed. C. not relevant.

Questions 6-10 — Complete the sentences. Write NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER.

6. Anna's current organisation is by _______. 7. Dr Chen recommends organising the review by _______ instead. 8. Anna is currently _______ words over the limit. 9. The next draft is due in _______ weeks. 10. Anna should keep her current version as a _______ file.