All three were mentioned: Listening Part 4 distractors
Ms Okafor's class of 14 sits a mock Listening paper. Part 4 is seven multiple-choice questions, three options each, based on a conversation between two students, Josh and Priya, about a class visit to a city museum.
Question 19 asks: 'What did Josh find most surprising about the museum?' A: how big the collection was. B: how good the interactive displays were. C: that entry was free.
Josh says: 'I'd expected to pay, so that was a nice surprise - and the interactive stuff was brilliant, though I've seen similar before. But what really struck me was how much they keep in storage; there's a whole floor nobody ever sees.'
Nine of the 14 students choose B. Four choose C. Nobody chooses A. The same nine also lose marks on Q21, where Priya says 'I thought it'd be boring, actually' and the correct answer is that her expectations changed. Several students answer as they listen and never use the pause to check.
1. Explain the design of Q19 as a distractor set. What exactly are students misreading, and what does the stem 'most surprising' require?
Read the worked answer
The stem is a superlative ranking question: not 'what did Josh mention' but 'what ranked highest for him'. Everything else in the recording is present precisely to be ranked lower.
C is the nastiest: it uses the stem's own word - 'a nice surprise'. Students hear the echo and stop. But it is framed as an expectation he brought with him ('I'd expected to pay'), it occupies half a clause, and it is never developed.
B is genuine praise, which is why nine students took it. The trap is the concession that follows: 'though I've seen similar before'. That clause demotes the displays from surprising to merely good. Students hear the strong adjective 'brilliant' and release their attention before the down-turn.
A is carried by an emphatic cleft - 'what really struck me was…' - followed by a concrete detail ('a whole floor nobody ever sees'). Emphatic structures, intensifiers ('really', 'absolutely'), and evaluative verbs ('struck me', 'amazed me', 'I couldn't get over') are how English marks the top of a ranking.
The generalisable rule: in Part 4, the correct option is usually attached to an evaluative frame, while distractors are dressed either in the stem's own vocabulary or in a strong adjective that is then withdrawn.
2. Diagnose the failure on Q21. What is the underlying listening skill, and what classroom routine builds it?
Read the worked answer
Q21 turns on two things at once: attitude and attribution.
Priya's 'I thought it'd be boring, actually' reports a change of expectation. Students who hear the word 'boring' file it as a negative opinion and look for a negative option. They have understood the content of the word but missed its tense and its 'actually' - the marker that says 'this is what I believed before, and it is no longer true'.
The second failure is attribution. Part 4 questions name a speaker ('What did Josh…', 'What does Priya…'). Under time pressure, students merge the two voices into one conversation and answer from whichever speaker they heard most recently.
Routine that builds both:
- Pre-listening stem reading (60 seconds): for each question, students mark who and what kind of judgement - opinion, feeling, reason, plan. They predict the shape of the answer before the audio starts.
- Two-column note-taking while listening: a column each for Josh and Priya, with attitude words recorded under the right name. Attribution becomes physical.
- Post-listening paraphrase: students restate each attitude in their own words before seeing the options. If they can paraphrase, they understood; if they can only point at a word, they matched.
- Replay the concession clauses only. Isolate 'though…', 'but…', 'to be honest…' and ask what each one does to the sentence before it.
3. One student argues that the recording is unfair because Josh mentions all three things. Respond.
Read the worked answer
The student is factually right and has drawn the wrong conclusion - and the response should say so plainly, because the misconception is the lesson.
Yes, Josh mentions all three. That is not a flaw in the item; it is the item. Real conversation is full of things that are mentioned and then dropped, praised and then qualified, or raised only to be dismissed. Part 4 does not test whether you can hear a topic. It tests whether you can hear what a speaker does with a topic.
So the useful question during the second listening is not 'did I hear that word?' but 'what did he do with it?' Four moves cover almost every distractor:
- Mentioned only - named, not evaluated. (A near-miss, not the answer.)
- Praised then withdrawn - 'brilliant, though I've seen similar'. (Distractor.)
- Raised as an expectation - 'I'd expected to pay'. (Sets up the real answer or is the trap itself.)
- Emphasised - cleft structures, stress, intensifiers. (Usually the answer.)
Acknowledge the frustration, then convert it into a rule the student can use under exam pressure: the recording will always contain more than the answer; your job is to find the ranking, not the topic.
One practical concession is worth making: if a student can hear all three topics and still cannot rank them, the problem is often processing speed, not strategy. Speed comes from volume of listening, not from more test practice.