For: Independent learners who can tell a personal story but need help discussing wider issues.
Test type: Academic and General Training share the Speaking test.
Study time: 30 minutes. This lesson develops a discussion skill; it is not a full Speaking test.
Your learning goals
- Identify whether a question asks for a reason, comparison or prediction.
- Develop an answer with a clear view, explanation and relevant example.
- Add a sensible qualification and improve one weakness in a recorded answer.
What changes in Part 3?
After the individual long turn, Part 3 explores related issues more generally and in greater depth. It lasts four to five minutes. You need to explain and discuss ideas, rather than continue describing one personal event. See the official Speaking format.
Speaking assessment covers fluency and coherence, lexical resource, grammatical range and accuracy, and pronunciation. A written sample cannot demonstrate real-time fluency or pronunciation. See official scoring guidance.
Our Part 2 lesson organised a personal experience. Here the new topic is public spaces, and the focus is reasoning about groups, choices and possible changes.
A flexible strategy
- Answer the actual question with a view or comparison.
- Explain why your point matters.
- Illustrate it with a realistic situation.
- Qualify it when necessary: explain a condition or exception.
These are options for developing an idea, not four sentences you must always produce. There is no fixed word count or required answer length for each Part 3 question. Follow the examiner’s questions and allow the discussion to develop.
A qualification limits a claim to make it more accurate: “This may suit large cities” is more careful than “This works everywhere”.
Worked example: develop a short answer
Question: Why do towns need public parks?
Short answer: “Because parks are good for people.”
Developed answer: “I think parks give people somewhere to spend time outdoors without paying to enter. That matters especially in areas where many residents live in flats. For example, a family could use a park for an evening walk when they have no garden at home. Of course, the space needs to feel safe and be maintained properly, or people may avoid it.”
The view is access to outdoor space. The explanation links that need to housing. The example makes it concrete, and the qualification recognises that quality matters too.
Natural sample discussion
These original models illustrate possible reasoning, not the only correct opinions or predicted test questions. No band score has been assigned.
Should local governments spend more on parks or indoor sports centres?
“I’d look at what the area is missing before choosing. A park can serve people of different ages without requiring them to book a session, so it may be the better investment in a crowded neighbourhood. On the other hand, an indoor centre gives people somewhere to exercise in bad weather. If a town already has several parks but no affordable indoor facilities, I would probably prioritise the centre. So I don’t think the same choice makes sense everywhere.”
Notice: The speaker compares benefits and makes the judgement depend on local needs. A conditional answer is still a clear answer when the condition is explained.
Will people use public spaces differently in the future?
“I suspect some spaces will need to serve more than one purpose. A square might be a quiet place to sit during the day and host a small market in the evening. That could be useful where land is expensive and communities cannot create a separate venue for every activity. But it would need careful organisation, because residents might not welcome noise late at night. I’d expect more shared uses, rather than every public space changing in exactly the same way.”
Notice: “I suspect”, “might” and “I’d expect” signal a prediction. The speaker gives a reason and a limitation without claiming certainty.
Useful language in context
- Maintain a space: keep it clean, safe and in good condition.
- Prioritise: treat one need as more important when choosing what to do first.
- Affordable: reasonably priced for the people who need it.
- On the other hand: introduce a contrasting consideration, not simply another similar point.
Independent practice: six discussion questions
Record your answers without reading the models. Take a brief thinking pause if needed; do not prepare a memorised speech.
- Why do some public spaces attract more visitors than others?
- How do children and older adults use public spaces differently?
- Should businesses help pay for the upkeep of public spaces?
- What problems can arise when many activities share one space?
- How might public spaces change as more people work from home?
- Is it more important to create new facilities or maintain existing ones?
Choose three questions for your first attempt. Answer directly, explain your reasoning and add detail when it helps. Then answer one follow-up: “Why might someone disagree?”
Review directions, not a single answer key
- Question 1: explain a cause, such as convenient access or feeling safe; show how it affects use.
- Question 2: compare needs or activities, while recognising that individuals vary.
- Question 3: give a position and discuss a possible condition, such as keeping access open to everyone.
- Question 4: identify a conflict and explain its effect, such as noise disturbing people seeking quiet.
- Question 5: make a cautious prediction and connect it to a plausible change in daily routines.
- Question 6: weigh need and condition; explain when one choice deserves priority.
You may reasonably disagree with any suggested direction. Check relevance and development, rather than whether your opinion matches the model.
Common mistakes and corrections
- Answering “Why?” with a description: state a cause and explain its effect.
- Giving only a personal example: connect it to the wider issue: “That experience suggests that clear signs can help new visitors.”
- “All older people dislike busy parks”: avoid unsupported absolutes. Say “Some older visitors may prefer quieter areas” and explain why.
- Adding examples without a clear point: explain what the example demonstrates.
- Using “on the other hand” for a similar benefit: reserve it for a contrast, or use “also”.
Self-review checklist
- I answered the question type: reason, comparison, prediction or judgement.
- My listener can identify my main point.
- I explained at least one reason instead of only listing ideas.
- My example supports that reason.
- I used conditions or cautious language where appropriate.
- I spoke clearly enough to be understood without rushing.
- I chose one issue from my recording and tried again with an improvement.
Support and your next step
Use ESS Disagreeing Politely in a Discussion to practise acknowledging another view naturally. Next, answer the other three independent-practice questions and compare your reasoning with your first recording. Use official Speaking samples when you are ready for broader practice.
Original independent ESS practice. No official IELTS affiliation or score prediction. References and ESS links checked on 30 October 2026.