Reading Between the Lines: A School Exchange Decision
A 17-year-old student, Lena, receives two emails about a week-long English exchange in Manchester. Email 1 (from the host school): "We'd love to have you, though we should mention that our project week overlaps with your exam period - we can be flexible on arrival day, but not on the project sessions themselves." Email 2 (from her teacher): "The trip is approved in principle. Please confirm by Friday; places are limited, and I can't guarantee a spot after that." Lena reads Email 1 as a rejection and Email 2 as a firm promise. She plans to reply to the host school asking them to move the project week, and to tell her teacher she has a confirmed place.
1. Identify the misreadings in Lena's interpretation of both emails, quoting the specific language that supports your analysis.
Read the worked answer
Email 1 is not a rejection. The phrase "we'd love to have you" is positive. "Though we should mention" introduces a caveat, not a refusal. The key clause is "we can be flexible on arrival day, but not on the project sessions" - this offers a partial accommodation (arrival timing) and states a fixed limit (sessions). Lena reads the limit as a closed door; in fact the host school is negotiating, not declining.
Email 2 is not a promise. "Approved in principle" is conditional: approval exists, but details are open. "Please confirm by Friday" sets a deadline on Lena, not a guarantee. "I can't guarantee a spot after that" implies a spot may exist now but is not reserved. Lena treats a conditional approval as a confirmed place.
Consequence: Her two planned actions are both based on misreadings. Asking the host school to move the project week ignores their explicit "not on the project sessions" and risks appearing not to have read the email.
2. Rewrite Lena's reply to the host school (60–90 words) so that it is accurate to the situation and still keeps the exchange open. Then state one sentence she should send her teacher.
Read the worked answer
To the host school: "Thank you for your positive reply and for offering flexibility on the arrival day. I understand the project sessions are fixed and I would not ask you to move them. Unfortunately the project week overlaps with my exam period, so I need to check with my school whether I can attend part of the week or arrive later. Could you tell me which sessions are essential to attend? I will confirm as soon as I have an answer."
To the teacher: "I understand the trip is approved in principle and that I must confirm by Friday; I am checking the overlap with my exams and will confirm before the deadline."
The reply accepts the host school's limit, asks a specific question (which sessions are essential), and avoids committing to something not yet agreed.
3. Explain which single piece of missing information would most change the decision, and how Lena should phrase the request for it.
Read the worked answer
The decisive gap is whether attendance at the fixed project sessions is a condition of participation, or whether partial attendance is acceptable. Everything else (arrival flexibility, approval in principle, the Friday deadline) is secondary: if the sessions are compulsory and clash with exams, the trip is impossible regardless of goodwill; if partial attendance is allowed, the trip may still work.
Lena should ask a closed, answerable question rather than a vague one: "Is full attendance at the project sessions required to take part, or may a student miss some sessions and complete the work another way?" This is better than "Can we work something out?" because it produces a yes/no answer she can act on before Friday. She should also ask her teacher whether the exam dates can be shifted - but that is a separate question to a separate person, and mixing them would blur responsibility.