Short answer: Part 3 is a four to five minute discussion of abstract questions linked to your Part 2 topic, and it is where the examiner decides between a 6 and a 7. A Part 3 answer is not a sentence but a short paragraph: a direct answer, a reason, an example, and a second angle or a limit. Three or four sentences, twenty to forty seconds, then stop and let the examiner ask the next one.
Candidates prepare Part 1 because it is first and Part 2 because it is frightening. Part 3 is where most of them lose the half band they were hoping for. The examiner puts down the cue card, looks at you, and asks a question that has no personal answer: "Do you think celebrities are effective role models?", "Should governments limit tourist numbers?". A candidate who has been talking comfortably about their own life for ten minutes suddenly answers in one sentence, and the examiner asks another question, and another, and the discussion never gets off the ground. The fix is a habit, not a talent: every Part 3 answer is built the same way, and once the shape is automatic, the content follows.
What Part 3 is testing
Part 1 asks about you. Part 2 asks you to describe. Part 3 asks you to think: to compare, to speculate, to weigh two sides, to explain why people behave as they do. The questions are about society in general, not about you, and they are linked to the theme of your cue card. If Part 2 was a building in your town, Part 3 will be about cities, architecture and public space. The examiner is allowed to push: "Why do you think that?", "Can you give me an example?", "Would that be true everywhere?". These are not signs that you are doing badly. They are the examiner giving you a chance to show the language that a 7 requires.
Three things are being measured at once. Fluency and coherence: can you keep going, and does each sentence follow from the last? Lexical resource: do you have the words for an abstract topic (a trend, a consequence, a policy, a generation) and not only for your kitchen and your holidays? Grammatical range: do conditionals, comparatives, passives and relative clauses appear naturally, because that is what discussing ideas requires? A one-sentence answer cannot display any of this, however correct it is.
The four-move method
An extended answer has four moves. Not every answer needs all four, but an answer with only the first is too short, and an answer that skips the first is unclear.
| Move | What it does | Phrases that start it |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Answer | A direct response to the question in one sentence. Yes, no, it depends, mostly, less than before. | I think so, on the whole... / Not really, and the reason is... / It depends on... |
| 2. Reason | Why you think that. One cause, stated plainly. | The main reason is that... / This is because... / What has changed is... |
| 3. Example | A concrete case: your country, your city, a person you know, something in the news, a typical situation. | In my country, for instance, ... / Take ... / A good example would be... |
| 4. Second angle | A limit, an exception, the other side, or a consequence. This is the move that separates a 6 from a 7. | That said, ... / It is not true for everyone, though, ... / The downside is that... / In the long run... |
The whole thing takes twenty to forty seconds. Then stop. A common failure is the candidate who has learned to extend and now cannot end: the examiner interrupts, the candidate feels cut off, and the next answer comes out short and nervous. Four moves, a full stop, eye contact. The examiner will ask the next question.
Ten real Part 3 questions, with an extended answer for five of them
The questions below are the Part 3 questions from the five Speaking tests on this site, two from each. The model answers are written at the level of a confident band 7: clear, developed, with a few good words, and not perfect. Read them for the shape, then answer the five without a model yourself, aloud, with a timer.
On role models (Test 1)
Do you think celebrities are effective role models in modern society? Why or why not?
Only some of them, to be honest. Celebrities are effective role models when what made them famous is something young people can actually copy: discipline in sport, years of practice in music. The problem is that the ones with the biggest audiences are often famous for being famous, and what they model is a lifestyle rather than a skill. In my country, for instance, footballers have a real influence on how boys train, whereas reality TV stars mostly influence what they buy. So I would say celebrities are effective, but not always in the direction we would want.
How has the concept of personal success changed over the past few decades? Answer it yourself: what did success mean for your grandparents, what does it mean for your friends, and what caused the change?
On travel (Test 2)
Some argue that mass tourism damages the very places it promotes, do you agree?
Largely, yes. When a place becomes a destination, the things that made it attractive, the quiet, the local life, the prices, are the first to go, because the town reorganises itself around visitors. Venice is the example everyone gives, but you can see it in any small coastal town in summer. That said, tourism also pays for things that would otherwise disappear, like historic buildings and traditional crafts, so the damage is not inevitable. It depends on whether the numbers are managed or simply allowed to grow.
Should governments limit tourist numbers at sensitive natural or cultural sites? Answer it yourself: what would a limit look like in practice, who would object, and does it work anywhere you know of?
On technology (Test 3)
Some believe technology is making people less creative, to what extent do you agree?
I would only partly agree. It is true that when an answer is one search away, people stop trying to work things out, and that is a kind of creativity we are losing. On the other hand, the tools themselves have made it far easier to create: a teenager can record an album or edit a film on a phone, which was impossible for my parents' generation. So technology has probably reduced the small everyday creativity, the improvising, while increasing what a determined person can produce. Whether that is a good trade depends on which kind you value more.
What responsibilities do technology companies have towards their users and towards society? Answer it yourself: name two responsibilities, and say which one companies actually accept.
On food (Test 4)
Do you think traditional cooking is being lost as people rely more on fast food and ready meals?
It is being lost at home, but not everywhere. The main reason is time: when both parents work, a dish that takes three hours is simply not cooked on a weekday, so children grow up without seeing it made. In my family the traditional recipes survive only through my grandmother, and nobody has written them down. What is interesting, though, is that the same dishes are now served in restaurants and shown in cooking videos, so the knowledge is moving out of the kitchen rather than disappearing. The risk is that it becomes something you buy rather than something you know how to do.
Should governments do more to encourage people to eat healthily? Why or why not? Answer it yourself: what could a government do, and where does encouragement become interference?
On cities (Test 5)
Why do you think so many people move from the countryside to cities?
Mostly for work, and everything that follows from work. Jobs in a modern economy are concentrated in cities, and so are universities, hospitals and the kind of services a young person expects. Where I come from, a village school might have twenty pupils, while the nearest city has three universities, so the move often starts with education and becomes permanent when the first job appears. There is a social side as well: cities offer anonymity and choice, which many people want in their twenties. What is new is that some of them are now moving back, because remote work has made the countryside affordable again in a way it was not.
How important is it for a city to have public spaces such as parks and squares? Answer it yourself: think of one public space you use, what would be lost without it, and who would lose most.
The same question at band 6 and band 7
The difference between the two bands is rarely a mistake. It is usually the absence of a move. Here is the last question again, answered twice.
How important is it for a city to have public spaces such as parks and squares?
I think it is very important. Parks are good for people because they can relax and do exercise. In my city there is a big park and many people go there at the weekend. So yes, public spaces are important for a city.
Very important, and more so as cities get denser. When flats are small, a park is effectively the garden that people cannot afford, and a square is where they meet people who are not their colleagues or their family. In my city the main park is the only place where you see all ages and all incomes together, which is rare anywhere else. The cost is that these spaces need maintaining, and when a council cuts the budget they are the first to decline, at which point people stop using them and the argument for closing them appears. So the importance is real, but it depends on the space being looked after.
The band 6 answer is correct and complete as a sentence. It has the answer and a reason, and an example that repeats the reason. The band 7 answer has the same length of ideas but adds the fourth move: a cost, a condition, a consequence. It also uses the grammar the topic asks for: a comparative ("more so"), a conditional idea ("when a council cuts"), a relative clause, a nominalised phrase ("the argument for closing them"). None of that was forced; it appeared because the candidate had one more thing to say.
The phrases that carry an abstract discussion
| Function | Phrases |
|---|---|
| Giving a measured opinion | On the whole, I would say... / I tend to think... / Largely, yes, although... |
| Speculating | It is likely that... / I imagine that... / If that continues, we will probably see... |
| Comparing then and now | A generation ago, ... whereas now... / What has changed is... / It used to be the case that... |
| Generalising with care | In most cases, ... / For the majority of people, ... / This is less true in rural areas. |
| Giving the other side | That said, ... / The counterargument is that... / It cuts both ways. |
| Consequence | As a result, ... / The knock-on effect is... / In the long run, that means... |
| Buying two seconds | That is a difficult one. / I have not thought about it before, but... / There are two ways to look at that. |
Two warnings. Learn these as a toolbox, not a script: an answer that begins "That is a difficult one" every time sounds rehearsed by the third question. And use the buying-time phrases once, at most twice, in the whole of Part 3. Their job is to cover the second in which you find your first move, not to fill the answer.
Five mistakes that cost the most
- Answering in one sentence and waiting. The examiner cannot give you marks for language you did not produce. Every Part 3 answer needs at least a reason.
- Telling a personal story. "When I went to Paris last year..." is a Part 2 answer. In Part 3, your experience is an example inside a general answer, not the answer itself.
- Repeating the question to start. "Do I think celebrities are effective role models? Well, celebrities being effective role models is..." wastes ten seconds and shows nothing. Start with the answer.
- Agreeing with everything. "Yes, I agree" to six questions in a row, with the same reason, reads as a candidate with one idea. Disagree with at least one question, or qualify it: "only in some cases".
- Not stopping. Four moves, then a full stop. An answer that runs past forty seconds gets interrupted, and the interruption unsettles the next one.
The Speaking test on this site records your answers to all three parts, transcribes them and returns an estimated band with the transcript, so you can read your own Part 3 answers and count the moves. Each of the five tests ends with four Part 3 questions on its theme, so there are twenty to practise on. If you have not yet read how the three parts fit together, start with IELTS Speaking Part 1, 2, 3: Cue Cards and Band 7 Answers; for the two minutes that come just before Part 3, read IELTS Speaking Part 2: How to Talk for 2 Minutes.
Quick answers
How long should a Part 3 answer be?
Three or four sentences, roughly twenty to forty seconds. Shorter than that and you have not developed the idea; longer and you are giving a speech, which the examiner will interrupt. The examiner is trying to fit four to six questions into four or five minutes, so a full answer that ends cleanly is exactly what they want.
Can I say I do not know?
You can say that you have not thought about it, but you must then think about it aloud. "That is not something I have considered, but I suppose..." followed by a real attempt scores; "I don't know" followed by silence scores nothing on fluency and gives the examiner no language to assess. Part 3 does not test knowledge, it tests whether you can reason in English about a question you have just heard.
Is it better to agree or disagree?
Neither. The examiner has no opinion on the topic and is not marking yours. What is marked is the way you build the answer: a position, a reason, an example, a nuance. Agreeing with the question and then developing it is as good as disagreeing; what is weak is a position with nothing behind it.
Does the AI examiner mark Part 3 differently?
No. On this site the three parts are recorded and transcribed, and the estimated band is given on fluency and coherence, lexical resource, grammatical range and accuracy, with pronunciation assessed from the audio as the least certain of the four. Part 3 weighs heavily because it is where the range of grammar and vocabulary shows. The band is an estimate, not an official result. The site is independent and not affiliated with IELTS, the British Council, IDP, or Cambridge English.
The short version: answer the question directly, give a reason, give an example, add a second angle, and stop after three or four sentences. Do that on ten questions and Part 3 becomes the easy part.