Duolingo Summarize the Conversation: 12 Examples With Audio

1. Student: I want to write about public transport for my research paper, but I have found so much material that I do not know where to begin.
2. Professor: That topic is too broad for this assignment. Is there one problem or decision that interests you?
3. Student: I am interested in whether cheaper fares actually persuade people to stop driving. Could I compare several countries?
4. Professor: You could, but the differences between countries would be difficult to explain in this paper. Consider comparing two nearby cities with different fare policies.
5. Student: That sounds manageable. Should I include interviews with passengers?
6. Professor: You do not need new interviews. Use the transport agencies' published passenger figures and discuss what those figures can and cannot show.
7. Student: I will choose two cities tonight and bring a revised question to your office hours on Thursday.
8. Professor: Good. Include the years you plan to compare so we can check whether the data are available.

A student asked a professor how to narrow a research paper on public transport. The professor recommended comparing two nearby cities with different fare policies instead of several countries. The student will use published passenger figures rather than conduct interviews and bring a revised question, including the comparison years, to office hours on Thursday.

• “two nearby cities”: Preserves the final scope, which replaces the earlier international comparison. Check transcript turn 4.
• “published passenger figures”: Identifies the agreed evidence source; interviews were only proposed. Check transcript turn 6.
• “on Thursday”: Keeps the specific next step without inventing approval of the final question. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

A weak version to compare

The student and professor discussed transport. The student will interview people in different countries.

Why the model is more accurate: The weak version reports rejected possibilities as the plan. The model tracks the narrower comparison and published data.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: Our project group needs a room tomorrow afternoon. The website shows no rooms for six people. Is there another way to reserve one?
2. Library assistant: The six-person rooms are full after two, but one is available from noon until one thirty. How many people are in your group?
3. Student: There are five of us. We wanted to meet at three because one person has a laboratory class earlier.
4. Library assistant: Then the earlier room would not help. We have a larger discussion area on the second floor, but it is not a private room.
5. Student: Will we be allowed to talk there? We need to rehearse part of a presentation.
6. Library assistant: Yes, normal conversation is fine. You cannot reserve individual tables, so I suggest arriving a little before three.
7. Student: We will use that area tomorrow and book a room earlier for next week.
8. Library assistant: That should work. Reservations open seven days ahead, and any member of your group can make one.

A student asked a library assistant for a study room for a five-person project group. The only available private room was too early for one member, so the group will use an unreserved discussion area at around three tomorrow. Talking is permitted there. They also plan to reserve a room earlier for the following week.

• “too early for one member”: Explains why the available room is rejected. Check transcript turn 2, 3, 4.
• “unreserved discussion area”: Preserves the distinction between an open area and a booked room. Check transcript turn 4, 6.
• “following week”: Separates tomorrow's solution from the future booking plan. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: I have started the lab report, but one of our temperature readings is missing. My partner and I both thought the other person had written it down.
2. Lab instructor: Do you still have the other readings and the notes about how you took them?
3. Student: Yes. We recorded everything else, including the time of each measurement. Can we use another group's number for the missing point?
4. Lab instructor: No, that would mix results from different experiments. Leave that point missing and explain the gap in your methods section.
5. Student: Will that make the graph impossible to discuss?
6. Lab instructor: You can discuss the pattern in the remaining observations. Be clear that you cannot draw a conclusion about the missing interval.
7. Student: All right. I will mark the gap and explain how it limits our interpretation.
8. Lab instructor: And add a brief suggestion for preventing the same recording problem next time.

A student consulted a lab instructor about a missing temperature reading. The instructor said not to substitute another group's result. The student should mark the missing point, explain the recording gap, and discuss only what the remaining observations support. The report should also explain the limitation and suggest how to avoid the same problem in future.

• “not to substitute”: Captures the explicit refusal, which is central to the advice. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “remaining observations support”: Limits the conclusion accurately. Check transcript turn 5, 6.
• “in future”: Records a recommendation rather than pretending the experiment was repeated. Check transcript turn 8.

A weak version to compare

The instructor told the student to borrow a result so the graph would be complete.

Why the model is more accurate: This reverses the advice. An accurate summary keeps the missing point visible and explains the resulting limitation.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Volunteer: I am leading the campus tour on Saturday. The forecast says heavy rain, and most of the route is outdoors.
2. Coordinator: Thanks for checking. We can move the welcome talk into the student center, but visitors still need to see the library and teaching building.
3. Volunteer: Could we skip the sports field and take the covered path between those buildings?
4. Coordinator: Yes. The field is optional, and the covered path will keep most of the walk dry. The tour will also be shorter.
5. Volunteer: Should I tell visitors to arrive later?
6. Coordinator: Keep the original start time. We can use the extra time for questions indoors at the end.
7. Volunteer: I will update the route sheet and tell the other volunteers this afternoon.
8. Coordinator: Please do. I will send visitors an email with the indoor meeting point.

A volunteer and an orientation coordinator adjusted Saturday's campus tour because heavy rain was forecast. They will hold the welcome talk indoors, skip the optional sports field, and use a covered path to the essential buildings. The start time will stay the same, with extra indoor questions afterward. The volunteer will update the route and inform colleagues, while the coordinator will email visitors.

• “forecast”: Signals an expected condition, not a claim that rain has already disrupted the event. Check transcript turn 1.
• “start time will stay the same”: Retains the correction to the volunteer's suggestion. Check transcript turn 5, 6.
• “while the coordinator”: Keeps the two communication responsibilities distinct. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Classmate A: I found a striking chart for our presentation, but I cannot find where the numbers came from. The website just says they are recent.
2. Classmate B: Can we use the report from the city planning office instead? It has a smaller chart, but the method and date are clear.
3. Classmate A: The city report only includes commuters, though. Our slide currently says it shows all residents.
4. Classmate B: Then we need to change that heading. We should not use the bigger chart just because it looks more impressive.
5. Classmate A: I agree. I can redraw the city chart so the labels are easier to read.
6. Classmate B: Great. Keep the original units and put the report reference below it.
7. Classmate A: I will also change the next slide, because our conclusion about everyone in the city is too broad.
8. Classmate B: Let us check that together before we rehearse tomorrow.

Two classmates chose a reliable source for a presentation chart. They rejected a striking chart with unclear data origins and will use a city planning report instead. Because the report covers commuters rather than all residents, they will revise the heading and narrow their conclusion. One student will redraw the chart with the original units and a reference, and they will check the changes before rehearsing tomorrow.

• “commuters rather than all residents”: Identifies the scope distinction driving the revisions. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “original units”: Preserves a specific constraint on redrawing the chart. Check transcript turn 6.
• “will check”: Does not claim that the revisions have already been completed. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: The statistics seminar I need is at the same time as my required history lecture. I thought there would be a second seminar group.
2. Academic adviser: There was one last term, but not this term. Have you completed the introductory statistics course?
3. Student: Yes, last year. Could I watch recordings of the history lecture instead of attending?
4. Academic adviser: You need to ask the history instructor about attendance. I cannot approve that arrangement. There is also an evening statistics seminar at the other campus.
5. Student: The evening group would fit, but I would need time to travel there. Does it have space?
6. Academic adviser: The system shows two places. Check the journey and then submit a transfer request if it is realistic.
7. Student: I will check the bus timetable today. I will keep my current registration until the transfer is confirmed.
8. Academic adviser: That is sensible. Contact me again if the request is not processed by Friday.

A student asked an academic adviser about a clash between statistics and a required history lecture. The adviser could not approve replacing lecture attendance with recordings but identified an evening statistics seminar at another campus. The student will check travel time and request a transfer if feasible, keeping the current registration until confirmation. The adviser should be contacted if the request is still unprocessed by Friday.

• “could not approve”: Distinguishes the adviser's authority from the instructor's. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “if feasible”: Keeps the transfer conditional on travel. Check transcript turn 5, 6, 7.
• “until confirmation”: Avoids saying the student has already changed classes. Check transcript turn 7.

A weak version to compare

The adviser approved recorded lectures, and the student transferred to an evening class.

Why the model is more accurate: Both claims overstate the outcome. The model distinguishes permission still needed from an option the student will investigate.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: I have drafted the label for the student exhibition, but it is nearly two hundred words. I cannot fit it beside the object.
2. Curator: Visitors will be standing, so the main label should be much shorter. What is the one thing they need to notice?
3. Student: The object was repaired several times, and each repair used a different material. I have also written a long history of the maker.
4. Curator: Focus the label on those repairs. You can put the maker's background on the exhibition website.
5. Student: Would a small photograph of the underside help? Two repairs are hidden there.
6. Curator: Yes, if the photograph is clear and you have permission to use it. Ask the collection manager before printing.
7. Student: I will shorten the text and send the photograph for approval today.
8. Curator: Bring both back tomorrow so we can check the layout together.

A student discussed an overlong exhibition label with a curator. The curator advised focusing on the object's repeated repairs and moving the maker's background to the website. A photograph could show hidden repairs, but it requires permission from the collection manager. The student will shorten the label, seek photograph approval, and return tomorrow to review the layout.

• “repeated repairs”: Preserves the agreed interpretive focus. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “requires permission”: Retains the condition attached to using the image. Check transcript turn 5, 6.
• “return tomorrow”: Records the next review, not final printing approval. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Classmate A: I tried our survey with my roommate. She did not know how to answer the question about regular exercise.
2. Classmate B: Was it the word regular? We never said whether that meant every day or every week.
3. Classmate A: Exactly. She also said that asking about exercise and sleep in one question made it hard to choose one answer.
4. Classmate B: We should separate those. Let us ask for the number of days of exercise in the past week, then ask about sleep on another page.
5. Classmate A: Do we need to send the revised survey to everyone now?
6. Classmate B: Not yet. Let us ask three classmates to test it first. We need to check whether the new wording is clear.
7. Classmate A: I will revise those questions tonight and keep a note of what we changed.
8. Classmate B: I will find the three testers. If they understand it, we can send it out after class on Wednesday.

Two classmates reviewed problems found during a trial of their survey. They will replace the vague term regular with a specific past-week exercise question and separate exercise from sleep. One will revise the wording and record the changes, while the other finds three testers. They plan to distribute the survey after class on Wednesday only if the revised version is clear.

• “past-week”: Captures how the vague time reference is clarified. Check transcript turn 1, 2, 3, 4.
• “separate exercise from sleep”: Identifies the second design problem and its fix. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “only if”: Keeps the planned distribution conditional on the trial. Check transcript turn 6, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: I reserved a camera for tomorrow's interview, but I just noticed that the booking does not include a microphone. Will the camera microphone be enough?
2. Media technician: Where are you recording?
3. Student: In the cafeteria after lunch. We chose it because the interview is about student food choices.
4. Media technician: The background noise could make the speech difficult to hear. I have a clip-on microphone available, but you should test it before the interview.
5. Student: Could I collect it this afternoon and try it in the cafeteria?
6. Media technician: Yes, after three. Bring your student card. The microphone and camera must both be returned by ten on Thursday morning.
7. Student: I will do that. If the test is too noisy, I can move to the meeting room next to the cafeteria.
8. Media technician: That would be a sensible backup. Check that the room is free before promising it to your interviewee.

A student asked a media technician about sound for an interview planned in a cafeteria. Because background noise may be a problem, the technician offered a clip-on microphone to collect after three with a student card and test beforehand. Both camera and microphone are due back by ten Thursday morning. A nearby meeting room is a backup, subject to availability.

• “may be a problem”: Reports a risk, not an already failed recording. Check transcript turn 3, 4.
• “both camera and microphone”: Preserves the scope of the return deadline. Check transcript turn 6.
• “subject to availability”: Avoids claiming the backup room is reserved. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

A weak version to compare

The technician booked a quiet room and said the equipment could be returned on Friday.

Why the model is more accurate: The room is an unchecked backup, and the return is Thursday morning. A polished sentence cannot compensate for altered facts.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Organizer: Our reading group wants to discuss a short story next month, but one member uses an audio version. The recording I found has a different ending.
2. Librarian: It may be an adapted edition. Do you know which printed edition the group is using?
3. Organizer: Yes, I brought the details. We want everyone to discuss the same text.
4. Librarian: I can check the accessible-format catalog for that edition. It may take a few days to confirm availability.
5. Organizer: Should we choose another story immediately?
6. Librarian: Not yet. Keep this one provisionally, but choose a backup with both print and audio available.
7. Organizer: I will ask the group to suggest a backup and wait for your update before announcing the final choice.
8. Librarian: I will contact you by Tuesday, even if I am still waiting for confirmation.

A reading-group organizer asked a librarian about an audio edition that differed from the group's printed story. The librarian will check for an accessible version of the same edition. The group will keep its choice provisional and prepare a backup available in print and audio before announcing a final text. The librarian will provide an update by Tuesday even if availability remains unconfirmed.

• “same edition”: Explains why simply finding any recording is insufficient. Check transcript turn 1, 3, 4.
• “provisional”: Preserves the unresolved choice. Check transcript turn 6, 7.
• “even if”: An update is promised by Tuesday; a confirmed audio edition is not. Check transcript turn 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Student: Your feedback says my essay has useful examples but the argument is difficult to follow. Should I add more examples?
2. Tutor: I would first work on the connections. Your second paragraph introduces a different position without explaining how it relates to your main claim.
3. Student: So the problem is not that the evidence is too weak?
4. Tutor: Some evidence needs more explanation, but adding new material would probably make the structure harder to manage. Try writing one sentence that states the purpose of each paragraph.
5. Student: Then I can see whether the paragraphs belong in that order.
6. Tutor: Exactly. If a paragraph has no clear role, you may need to move it or remove it.
7. Student: I will make that outline before revising the full essay. Can I bring it to the writing clinic?
8. Tutor: Yes. Bring the assignment instructions too, so the adviser can check that your revised plan still answers the question.

A student asked a tutor how to respond to essay feedback. The tutor recommended clarifying the links between paragraphs before adding examples, since the main difficulty was the argument's structure. The student will outline each paragraph's purpose and reconsider their order or relevance. They will take the outline and assignment instructions to the writing clinic to check the revised plan.

• “before adding examples”: Preserves the priority rather than claiming all evidence is already adequate. Check transcript turn 1, 2, 3, 4.
• “purpose”: Explains the concrete revision method. Check transcript turn 4, 5, 6.
• “assignment instructions”: Includes why this document is needed at the clinic. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.

1. Volunteer: I signed up for the museum desk on Friday morning, but my course has added a field trip. Could I switch to the afternoon?
2. Supervisor: The afternoon desk is already covered. Would Saturday morning work for you?
3. Volunteer: I work on Saturdays. I could still help for an hour before the field trip, but I cannot stay for the whole Friday shift.
4. Supervisor: One hour would leave a gap. Let us ask the reserve volunteers first. You do not need to cancel the field trip.
5. Volunteer: I can send a message to the reserve list today. Should I offer to swap another Friday shift?
6. Supervisor: Yes, mention that option. If nobody can cover, tell me by Wednesday afternoon and I will change the desk arrangement.
7. Volunteer: I will keep you updated. I will not assume the swap is confirmed until someone agrees.
8. Supervisor: Thank you. Once we have a replacement, I will update the official roster.

A museum volunteer asked to change a Friday shift because of a course field trip. Neither Friday afternoon nor Saturday was suitable, and a one-hour appearance would not cover the desk. The volunteer will ask the reserve list for cover or a future swap and report back by Wednesday afternoon if unsuccessful. The supervisor will update the roster after a replacement agrees.

• “Neither”: Compresses two rejected alternatives accurately. Check transcript turn 2, 3, 4.
• “if unsuccessful”: The Wednesday report is a fallback, not confirmation of cover. Check transcript turn 6.
• “after a replacement agrees”: Keeps the roster change dependent on an actual agreement. Check transcript turn 7, 8.

This is one possible summary. Different wording and a different selection of supporting details can work when the main purpose, developments and outcome remain accurate.