- You will hear a report once. It is about 3 minutes long.
- Then 6 questions will appear.
- Choose the best way to answer each question from the drop-down menu.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Correct Answer: offer language training to staff after they are hired.
Why this is correct: The speaker gives a personal view near the close of the report. For roles that do not need French, staff could get language training after hiring.
Tips: Separate the speaker's own plan from the points made by other people in the report.
Why the other options are wrong:
- accept a basic level of French instead of full fluency.: Dr. Tremblay says bilingual skill is about readiness, not perfection. She means roles that deal with the public, not the speaker's plan for other roles.
- require French only in offices in Quebec and New Brunswick.: Quebec and New Brunswick come up in the supporters' part. The speaker's plan is about the needs of each role, not about provinces.
- require staff to learn French within a set time after hiring.: The speaker only says other positions could offer training. There is no rule that staff must learn French by a deadline.
Correct Answer: may be transferred or promoted across regions.
Why this is correct: Supporters link fairness to staff moving around the country. Employees may be transferred or promoted across regions, so both languages keep service fair and continuous.
Tips: Notice which reason is tied to which claim. A point can be true in the report but support a different claim.
Why the other options are wrong:
- often deal directly with members of the public.: Dealing with the public is part of Dr. Tremblay's point about readiness. It is not the reason supporters give for fairness.
- are mostly based in the Ottawa-Gatineau area.: Ottawa-Gatineau is mentioned at the start to show how big the employer is. It is not given as a reason for fairness.
- often serve the public in Quebec and New Brunswick.: Supporters say French service is practical in Quebec and New Brunswick. They do not say that this is why staff make service fairer.
Correct Answer: that more bilingual staff help departments serve people in their language.
Why this is correct: The report found fewer complaints about language access in departments with more bilingual staff. This backs the supporters' view that bilingual staff help serve people properly.
Tips: Ask what the evidence actually measured, and which claim that result can support.
Why the other options are wrong:
- that readiness, not perfect French, gives better results in public roles.: Readiness rather than perfection is Dr. Tremblay's opinion. It comes after the report and is not a measured result.
- that service stays steady when bilingual staff move across regions.: Staff moving across regions is a reason supporters give. The report does not measure what happens when staff move.
- that French services are used heavily in Quebec and New Brunswick.: Supporters say French service is practical in Quebec and New Brunswick. The report does not measure how much it is used.
Correct Answer: can screen out talented people from certain regions.
Why this is correct: Critics say talented people from the West and North are screened out. The speaker then gives the example of a neighbour in Alberta who was rejected because of French.
Tips: Think about what the story is meant to show, not only what happens in it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- can slow down hiring across the public service.: Slower hiring is a point made later, by people who question the rule. The neighbour was rejected, not delayed.
- can block promotions for staff who move between regions.: Staff moving between regions comes from the supporters' part. The neighbour was applying for a first job, not a promotion.
- can narrow the range of experience among staff.: Less variety of experience is also a later point. The neighbour story is given as an example of people being screened out.
Correct Answer: They find it discouraging and somewhat outdated.
Why this is correct: Critics say the rule feels discouraging. They also call it outdated, but only to some extent, so their judgment is not total.
Tips: Listen for the exact feeling words, and for small words that make a claim stronger or weaker.
Why the other options are wrong:
- They find it discouraging and somewhat unrealistic.: The feeling is right, but critics call the rule outdated. They never say it is unrealistic.
- They find it frustrating and somewhat unrealistic.: Critics do not say the rule is frustrating or unrealistic.
- They find it frustrating and somewhat outdated.: The judgment is right, but the feeling critics name is discouraging, not frustrating.
Correct Answer: About 280 complaints.
Why this is correct: The report says complaints dropped by almost 30%. A drop of about 30% from 400 leaves about 280 complaints.
Tips: Work out the size and the direction of the change before you calculate.
Why the other options are wrong:
- About 320 complaints.: This uses the Census figure of 19.6%, which is about French as a mother tongue. It is not the change in complaints.
- About 520 complaints.: This adds 30% instead of taking it away. The report says complaints dropped.
- About 480 complaints.: This uses the wrong figure and also adds it. Complaints went down by almost 30%.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation