IELTS Speaking Part 3 Discussion Skills
How IELTS Speaking Part 3 links to your Part 2 topic, the compare, speculate and evaluate language that extends answers, common fails, and a weekly practice loop.
What Part 3 actually tests
Part 3 is a four to five minute two-way discussion that grows out of your Part 2 topic but moves into broader, more abstract territory: comparing past and present, weighing causes and effects, or speculating about the future. Unlike Part 1's personal questions, Part 3 rarely has one correct answer, and examiners are listening for how you build and defend a position, not which side you take.
Because Part 3 sits at the end of the test, it also carries the weight of everything examiners have observed so far. A candidate who sounded fluent in Part 1 and Part 2 but gives one-sentence Part 3 answers will usually see their band pulled down, since range and development across abstract topics cannot be credited if it never appears.
How Part 3 links from your Part 2 topic
Examiners typically write Part 3 questions around the general theme of your Part 2 cue card, then widen it into a societal or general question. A Part 2 card about describing a skill you learned might lead into Part 3 questions about how technology has changed the way people learn skills in general, or whether schools should teach more practical skills.
| Part 2 topic | Typical Part 3 direction |
|---|---|
| Describe a skill you learned | How people learn skills now versus in the past; whether schools should teach more practical skills |
| Describe a place you enjoy visiting | How tourism affects local communities; whether public spaces should be free to enter |
| Describe a person who influenced you | Whether public figures should be role models; how influence has changed with social media |
| Describe a change in your life | Whether people generally adapt well to change; how technology has sped up change in society |
Extending an answer: stance, reason, example, wrap-up
A dependable shape for Part 3 answers is stance, reason, example or contrast, then a short wrap-up. This structure gives every answer at least three or four sentences without sounding rehearsed, because the content changes completely from question to question while the shape stays flexible.
- 1State your stanceAnswer the actual question directly in one sentence before adding detail: I think, on balance, or it really depends on.
- 2Give one clear reasonExplain why you hold that view with a because clause, not just a repeated restatement of the stance.
- 3Add an example or contrastA short real or plausible example, or a contrast with another country or time period, shows range beyond a bare opinion.
- 4Wrap up brieflyOne closing sentence that signals you are finished, such as so overall I'd say, without repeating everything you just said.
Compare, speculate and evaluate language
Part 3 rewards a specific family of functional language that Part 1 rarely needs: comparing two situations, speculating about something uncertain, and evaluating whether something is good, bad or effective. Building a small, controlled bank of these chunks matters more than learning long lists of topic vocabulary.
- Comparing: whereas, in contrast to, unlike in the past, compared with, both... but.
- Speculating: it's likely that, I imagine, it probably depends on, in some countries this may be different.
- Evaluating: the main advantage is, one drawback would be, on balance, it's arguably more important to.
- Hedging honestly: I'm not entirely sure, but, from what I understand, I could be wrong, but.
Common Part 3 fails
Most Part 3 mark loss comes from a small number of repeated habits rather than weak grammar or vocabulary on their own.
- One-word or one-sentence answers that give the examiner nothing to credit for range or development.
- Drifting away from the actual question asked into a general, memorised speech on the topic.
- Refusing to take any stance at all, answering every question with it depends without ever developing that idea.
- Long silent pauses while searching for one perfect word instead of paraphrasing and continuing.
Worked mini case: weak versus strong answers to the same question
Take a typical Part 3 question: do you think older and younger generations have different attitudes towards work? Compare a weak, underdeveloped answer with a stronger one that uses the stance, reason, example, wrap-up shape.
Under-developed
Weak answer
Yes, I think so. Older people work harder. Young people want easy jobs.
- •No reason given for the claim
- •No example or evidence
- •Sounds like an opinion with nothing behind it
Fully developed
Strong answer
I'd say there is a real gap. Older generations often grew up expecting long-term jobs with one company, whereas younger people tend to value flexibility and work-life balance more, partly because job security looks different now. My parents, for instance, stayed with the same employer for over twenty years, which is fairly rare among people my age. So overall, I think the attitude has shifted more than the work ethic itself.
- •Clear stance in the first sentence
- •Reason connected to changing job security
- •Personal example plus a clean wrap-up
A weekly practice loop
Treat Part 3 as a skill trained in short, timed reps rather than a topic you revise once. Link every practice session back to a Part 2 card so the Part 3 questions feel connected rather than random, the way they will in the real exam.
- 1Pick a Part 2 cardChoose one cue card from this week's Speaking topics and note its likely Part 3 theme.
- 2Answer three Part 3 questionsUse stance, reason, example, wrap-up for each, aiming for close to thirty seconds per answer.
- 3Review for one habitListen back once and check for a single repeated fail from the list above, then target only that habit next session.
Where to go next and frequently asked questions
Comparing your own answers with fuller sample responses on the same theme family helps you see structure in action rather than in the abstract. Use samples for structure and pacing, not for memorising word for word, since Part 3 questions vary too much between test dates for a fixed script to transfer safely.
- Speaking Pro sample answers - See fully developed Part 3 responses on current topic families.
- All Speaking parts - How Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 fit together across the whole test.
- This week's Speaking topics - Fresh Part 2 cards with linked Part 3 discussion questions.
- Compare plans - See what unlocks with Pro if you want deeper sample answers and feedback.
Is it okay to disagree with the examiner's implied assumption in a question?+
Yes. Examiners are not testing whether you hold a particular opinion, only whether you can develop and support whichever stance you take. A well-reasoned disagreement scores just as well as agreement.
How long should a Part 3 answer be?+
Roughly twenty to forty seconds is a reasonable target: long enough to show stance, reason and example, short enough that the examiner can ask a natural follow-up question.
What if I don't know anything about the topic?+
Speculate honestly rather than inventing false expertise. Phrases like I don't know much about this, but I'd imagine keep you talking while staying accurate about the limits of your knowledge.
Does Part 3 matter as much as Part 2 for my final band?+
All three parts feed into the same four criteria across one continuous performance. A strong Part 2 does not offset a consistently underdeveloped Part 3, since examiners are scoring range and coherence across the whole test, not part by part.