Comprehension quiz

Circular Economy Group Project

Listen to the lesson carefully, then answer 10 comprehension questions. Pick one option per question.

Question 1What are the students mainly doing in this discussion?

Evaluating the results of their interviews Choosing a topic and planning their group project Preparing questions for their tutor Comparing fast fashion with electronics markets

Question 2When is the group project proposal actually due according to the latest information?

On Monday On Wednesday On Thursday On Friday

Question 3Why do they prefer interviewing a repair cafe coordinator over a questionnaire?

The coordinator offered to help them Interviews take less time than questionnaires Questionnaires produced weak responses last term The marker requires primary interview data

Question 4Which industry is the speaker now leaning strongly towards?

Fast fashion Food packaging Car manufacturing Consumer electronics

Question 5Why does the consumer electronics industry suit the project well?

It is growing faster than fashion Several major manufacturers already run take back schemes Its products are easy to recycle The tutor is an expert in it

Question 6Where did the correct deadline information come from?

A more recent email from the department A notice on the library website The printed course handbook A message from another student

Question 7Which two terms must the students carefully distinguish in their project?

Reuse and resale Manufacturing and distribution Refurbishment and recycling Consumption and disposal

Question 8Which stage retains by far the most value, according to the speakers?

The design stage The recycling stage The transport stage The refurbishment stage

Question 9What do the students plan to do before Thursday's supervision session?

Submit the final proposal Divide the reading and compare annotated notes Conduct the first interview Visit a local repair cafe

Question 10Why did the tutor criticise the group's original plan?

The deadline was unrealistic The scope of the project was too broad The reading list was too short The data sources were unreliable