Speaking Part 3Target band 7Education

Task

Follow-up discussion on education. - Why do some people continue studying long after they leave school? - Should governments pay for adult education, or should individuals? - Is classroom teaching likely to disappear in the future?

Task

Part 3 wants generalisation and speculation, not your own school memories. If you find yourself saying "in my case", you have slipped back into Part 1.

Model answer(246 words)

Why do some people continue studying long after they leave school? Several reasons, and I think they've shifted over time. The obvious one is economic — qualifications expire in practical terms, so people retrain because their field has moved. But there's a second reason that gets less attention, which is that formal study gives structure to something people would otherwise never get round to. Buying a book about economics and actually reading it are very different commitments, and enrolling forces the second. Should governments pay for adult education, or should individuals? I'd say it depends on what the study is for, which sounds evasive but I think it's the honest answer. Where retraining is caused by an industry closing, the state has a reasonable interest in funding it, because the alternative is paying unemployment benefit for longer. Where someone studies for personal interest, it's harder to argue the public should carry the cost. The difficulty is that the two are not cleanly separable in practice. Is classroom teaching likely to disappear in the future? I'd be surprised. Predictions of that kind have been made about every technology since television, and what actually happened each time was that the classroom absorbed the tool rather than being replaced by it. What may well disappear is the lecture — one person talking to two hundred is the part that transfers to video without much loss. The seminar, where the value is in being interrupted, is much harder to replicate.

Why this answer scores well

Every answer generalises. There is no "when I was at school" anywhere, which is the discipline Part 3 requires and the thing candidates most often fail at — sliding back into personal anecdote is comfortable and costs marks. The second answer is worth studying. "It depends on what the study is for, which sounds evasive but I think it's the honest answer" does two things at once: it flags that the speaker knows a conditional answer can look like avoidance, and then it justifies the condition. That self-awareness reads as genuine thought rather than hedging. The third answer argues from historical pattern to prediction, then narrows the claim — not "classrooms will survive" but "the lecture may go, the seminar will not". Narrowing a prediction to the part you can defend is a Band 7-plus move. Lexical Resource: "expire in practical terms", "get round to", "cleanly separable", "absorbed the tool". The phrase "where the value is in being interrupted" is compact and precise. Grammatical Range: present perfect for the shift ("they've shifted"), a passive with a perfect ("have been made"), a hedged modal ("may well disappear"), and conditional structures across all three answers. Note the length. Part 3 answers should be noticeably longer than Part 1 but still speech — three to five sentences each, not a monologue.

Grammar used here

Studifor is not affiliated with or endorsed by IELTS, the British Council, IDP or Cambridge. All practice material here is written by Studifor.