Podcast Interview: Teacher’s Qualified Stance on Homework
You hear this extract from a student podcast. Host: 'So you support banning homework in Year 9?' Teacher: 'I can see the appeal, and I have read the studies about stress. But I would not go that far. What worries me is the gap between students who get help at home and those who do not. A complete ban sounds fair, but it may hide that gap rather than close it. I would prefer a cap: 30 minutes per subject, and no homework over the weekend.' Host: 'So you’re against the campaign?' Teacher: 'Not against the people - against the slogan.' You are writing a short article for the school website and want to quote the teacher accurately.
1. What is the teacher’s position? Identify two phrases that show it is qualified rather than a simple yes or no.
Read the worked answer
The teacher does not support a complete ban. They support a cap of 30 minutes per subject and no weekend homework. The position is qualified, not a simple yes/no. Phrase one: 'I can see the appeal' concedes value to the campaign before disagreeing. Phrase two: 'But I would not go that far' sets a limit to agreement. A third cue is 'Not against the people - against the slogan', which separates the campaigners from the policy. A listener who hears only 'stress' or 'fair' may misclassify the teacher as a supporter; the contrast markers carry the stance.
2. How should you quote the teacher in the article without misrepresenting them? Write a quote and explain one thing you would not do.
Read the worked answer
Quote: 'A complete ban sounds fair, but it may hide that gap rather than close it,' said the teacher, who would prefer a 30-minute cap per subject and no weekend homework. I would not run the headline 'Teacher supports homework ban' or quote only 'I can see the appeal', because both remove the concession-then-contrast structure. The quote must include the 'but' clause or the summary must state the alternative policy. Accuracy here means preserving the qualified stance, not just using exact words.
3. The host says 'So you’re against the campaign?' How does the teacher’s reply correct the question, and why does that correction matter for a school-website article?
Read the worked answer
The reply 'Not against the people - against the slogan' corrects a false either/or. The host turns a policy disagreement into personal opposition; the teacher separates the two. For the article, this matters because it prevents a personalised conflict frame. A responsible article would report: 'The teacher disagrees with the slogan of a complete ban, not with the campaigners.' This keeps the debate about policy design (cap vs ban) rather than loyalty. The listening skill is hearing the correction of the presupposition in the question, not just the words 'not against'.