Check what the number measures
A topic can have several measurements with the same unit. Two values expressed as temperatures may still describe different things. This lesson asks you to identify the object measured, the time of observation and the part of a place covered by a survey. Those details determine whether a comparison is meaningful.
For every measurement in the passage, note three labels: what, where and when. Then check whether a later conclusion keeps those labels. For matching-paragraph questions, look for the purpose of the information, such as correcting a mistaken comparison or widening coverage, rather than searching for one repeated word.
This is ORIGINAL IELTS-style practice written for this site. It is not an answer key to a Cambridge passage or another named published test. The short lesson develops evidence-finding skills; it is not a complete IELTS test and cannot estimate your band. Read the passage before opening any answer reveal.
- Skim once and give each paragraph a short purpose label in your own words.
- Read each task instruction, then mark the exact evidence for your answer. Keep uncertainty visible instead of guessing silently.
- Check the explanation after answering. If your answer was correct for the wrong reason, record the reasoning error too.
Original passage: The map with two kinds of temperature
Paragraph A gives sourced heat-island background. The town, equipment trial, volunteer decisions and mapping results in paragraphs B–E are fictional. No local temperature data or health advice is provided.
A. Urban surfaces and air do not always tell the same temperature story. The United States Environmental Protection Agency distinguishes surface heat islands from atmospheric heat islands, and explains that buildings and paved surfaces absorb and release heat differently from natural landscapes. Temperatures can also vary within a city. These ideas prompted a fictional neighbourhood group in Valehaven to plan a small mapping exercise. Its members wanted to compare places carefully, rather than colour an entire district red after finding one unusually warm surface.
B. The group’s first draft combined pavement readings from a handheld surface instrument with air readings from another device. Coordinator Mira removed the combined ranking because the instruments were measuring different things. She created two separate sheets and labelled each with the measurement type. Volunteers also recorded the time and exact location. A warm pavement result remained useful, but it could no longer be presented as if it directly described the surrounding air or everyone’s experience of the street.
C. The route initially passed only through the shopping area, where several volunteers worked. At a planning meeting, residents from the edge of the district pointed out that their streets would be missing. The group added a second route through those streets and a park. It did not assume the new route would be cooler. The purpose was to reduce a gap in coverage, and the organisers wanted the eventual map to distinguish places that had been visited from places for which no readings existed.
D. On the first survey day, one team reached its final stops much later than intended. The organisers retained the readings but marked the timing difference beside them. They decided not to treat the route comparison as a controlled test. For a second visit, the teams agreed on a shared timetable and checked their recording sheets together beforehand. Mira described this as improving comparability, not guaranteeing identical weather or eliminating every source of uncertainty from an outdoor exercise.
E. The public display showed both the readings and a short account of their limitations. Areas outside the routes remained unshaded instead of receiving guessed values. Residents could suggest places for a future survey, but the map did not rank every home or prescribe a building project. The organisers hoped that a modest, well-labelled picture would lead to more useful questions. A map could reveal where information was available and where it was missing; its visual precision should not be mistaken for complete knowledge of a neighbourhood.
Questions 1–9
Answer only from the passage. Outside knowledge may help you understand a topic, but it cannot fill a gap in the writer’s account.
Choose TRUE if the statement agrees with the passage, FALSE if it contradicts the passage, or NOT GIVEN if the passage does not decide it.
Complete each sentence with NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS copied exactly from the passage.
Choose the paragraph, A–E, that contains the specified information. You may use a letter more than once.
Choose the one best answer, A, B, C or D.
- A. The organisers wanted to pretend every reading was taken simultaneously.
- B. All readings from the first day had been lost.
- C. The surface instruments could only measure rainfall.
- D. Different observation times limited how directly the routes could be compared.
- A. Assuming a precise-looking map provides complete information.
- B. Using any map to ask a further research question.
- C. Separating observed places from unvisited areas.
- D. Recording limitations next to numerical results.
Answers with passage evidence
Open these after attempting all nine questions. The paragraph references let you check each judgement against the original wording rather than trusting a bare key.
1. Reveal answer and explanation
TRUE. Paragraph B describes surface readings and air readings in one draft ranking. Mira separated them because their shared temperature unit did not mean they measured the same thing. The question concerns the initial draft, before revision.
2. Reveal answer and explanation
FALSE. Paragraph C explicitly says they did not make that assumption. The route was added to improve coverage. Including a park may tempt you to predict its results, but the passage rejects treating that prediction as the organisers’ starting conclusion.
3. Reveal answer and explanation
NOT GIVEN. The passage discusses instruments and recording sheets but gives no ownership information. Using an instrument does not show that a volunteer owns it; it could be borrowed, shared or supplied by an organisation.
4. Reveal answer and explanation
sheets. Paragraph B says she created two separate sheets labelled by measurement type. “Routes” appears elsewhere but refers to survey coverage. Read the verb and surrounding context rather than selecting a nearby plural noun.
5. Reveal answer and explanation
shared timetable. Paragraph D gives the two-word phrase “shared timetable”. This addresses the timing mismatch from the first visit. “Identical weather” is specifically not guaranteed, so it cannot replace the planned arrangement.
6. Reveal answer and explanation
C. Paragraph C adds streets at the district’s edge and a park after residents identify missing areas. B changes the organisation of measurements, while D changes timing; neither expands the geographical coverage.
7. Reveal answer and explanation
E. Paragraph E leaves unsurveyed areas unshaded rather than filling them with guessed values. This makes missing evidence visible. It does not mean those areas were measured and found to have an identical temperature.
8. Reveal answer and explanation
D. Paragraph D identifies a timing difference that limits comparability. Marking it preserves usable observations while showing the limitation. The organisers neither fabricated replacement values nor claimed a perfectly controlled outdoor experiment.
9. Reveal answer and explanation
A. Paragraph E warns that visual precision is not complete knowledge. A carefully drawn map can still have limited coverage and uncertainty. The passage does not reject maps or claim that every unshaded place is cooler.
Rewrite without changing the claim
Your paraphrase should preserve a methodological improvement without turning it into a guarantee. Look for the words that limit what the revised timetable achieves.
Rewrite: “Mira described this as improving comparability, not guaranteeing identical weather.” Use “although” or “but”.
Compare a possible rewrite
Mira saw the shared timetable as a way to improve comparisons, but not as a guarantee of identical weather.
The rewrite preserves Mira’s assessment of the planned change and the remaining uncertainty. “The timetable made the weather identical” changes a measurement arrangement into control over weather. “The timetable was useless” also misrepresents the passage, which describes an improvement rather than perfection.
There is more than one good rewrite. Check meaning before vocabulary: keep the same people, time, comparison, and degree of certainty. A sophisticated synonym is a poor choice if it changes what the passage claims. This writing extension is for learning; the sentence-completion questions above still require exact words from the passage.
Make the next attempt more accurate
Review Questions 1 and 6 together. The first is about different kinds of measure; the second is about which places were included. If both mistakes look like “not enough data” in your notes, make the diagnosis more precise. Better notes identify the kind of problem so you can recognise it in a different passage.
Keep a three-part error note: the answer you chose, the words you overlooked, and one action for next time. For a NOT GIVEN error, name the missing information. For a completion error, check the word limit and grammar. For a multiple-choice error, explain why the strongest distractor fails, rather than only repeating the correct option.
Continue with table completion, diagram labelling, skimming and scanning.
For wider preparation alongside these short lessons, visit the main IELTS practice resource and choose the skill you want to work on next.
Sources and scope
The EPA source supports the short factual background on surface and atmospheric heat islands. Valehaven and all survey details are invented. No numerical local findings, heat-risk assessment or building recommendation is presented.
- US EPA: What Are Heat Islands?: The distinction between surface and atmospheric heat islands and variation within urban areas.
Public factual sources checked on 15 October 2026. The passage wording, teaching scenario, questions and explanations are original. Fictional people, decisions and results are not evidence about real organisations or populations.