How long should my answer to this Part 2 cue card be?

Speak for 1 to 2 minutes. The examiner will stop you at 2 minutes, so aim for roughly 220-300 words that cover every bullet on the card and end with how you feel about it.

What Part 3 questions follow this cue card?

After "A Competition You Would Like to Take Part In", examiners have asked 9 follow-up discussion questions, listed above. They move from your personal story to general opinions on the same theme.

Is this cue card still being used?

It was most recently reported by test-takers in May–Aug 2026. Cue cards rotate every four months, and many topics return in later seasons with slightly different wording.

IELTS Speaking Part 2

A Competition You Would Like to Take Part In

Most recently asked in May–Aug 2026

The cue card

Describe a competition, for example music, cooking, or sport, you would like to take part in

You should say:

what the competition is
where and when it happens
what you have to do to win the competition
and explain why you would like to take part in this competition

Sample answers: Band 6.5, 7.0 & 7.5

Three versions of the same answer, each written to sit genuinely at that band — compare them to see exactly what separates the scores.

Band 6.5

The 6.5 answer moves through the cue card with plain, factual sentences ('There are different distances, from five kilometers up to a full marathon') and one straightforward reason for wanting to take part, typical of clear but unembellished Band 6.5 fluency.

The competition I would like to take part in is the Da Nang International Marathon. It happens every year in September, along the coast road near My Khe Beach, not far from where I usually run at weekends.

There are different distances, from five kilometers up to a full marathon, so people of different levels can join. To do well, you obviously need to train regularly for a few months before the race, build up your distance slowly, and also get enough sleep and eat properly, especially in the final week.

I would probably choose the half marathon distance, since I already run sometimes on weekends with my friend Huy, but never more than eight kilometers. I have watched the race twice as a spectator, standing near Dragon Bridge with a bottle of water, cheering for the runners, and every time I feel like I want to be one of them next year.

I want to take part mainly to challenge myself, because I have never finished a long race before, and I think it would give me a real sense of achievement. Also, running along the beach and the bridge with thousands of other people sounds like a really exciting experience, much better than running alone every weekend.

209 words · about 2 minutes

Why this band

LR“a real sense of achievement” — The plain, common phrase 'a real sense of achievement' expresses the motivation simply, without reaching for more precise or idiomatic language, fitting Band 6.5.
FC“I have watched the race twice as a spectator” — This sentence states a concrete supporting fact — past spectator experience — in one plain, direct clause, without elaborating on what that experience was like beyond the following sentence's detail about standing at Dragon Bridge. A 7.0 answer would likely fold a brief reaction into this same sentence; a 7.5 answer might use the detail to build toward a more explicit insight. Here the fact is delivered clearly and simply, giving modest but relevant support to the claim of wanting to join the race, the 'clear but modest development' standard for Band 6.5.
GRA“since I already run sometimes on weekends with my friend Huy, but never more than eight kilometers” — A 'since'-clause giving the reason for the chosen distance is followed by a 'but'-clause that immediately qualifies it with a limitation — never more than eight kilometres — combining reason and contrast in one sentence without further subordination. A 7.0 answer would likely vary this into a more integrated structure, perhaps with a participial phrase; the plainer 6.5 pattern keeps the reason and the qualifying 'but' as two clearly separated, easily produced clauses. This is accurate, functional complexity typical of 6.5, correct but not particularly varied, while still conveying a realistic detail about current running habits.

Band 7.0

The 7.0 answer adds a bit more development to each point, such as explaining why the day job 'feels quite safe in comparison', and uses natural spoken connectors like 'mostly because' and 'honestly' without reaching for idiomatic language.

The competition I'd like to take part in is a design hackathon called the Vietnam Design Jam. It runs every November in Ho Chi Minh City, usually inside a co-working space in District 1, and teams of three get a brief on Friday evening - last year's was something like 'help street vendors manage their money' - then have until Sunday afternoon to turn it into a working app prototype.

To do well, you need more than just nice-looking screens. The judges are a mix of product people and investors, and they mainly look at whether the idea would actually work for real users, how easy the prototype is to use, and how well you present it in a short pitch at the end. Teams that usually win go out on Saturday morning to actually talk to vendors, and then build their idea around what they hear, which I think is the most interesting part.

I've followed the competition for a couple of years without entering, mostly because my day job feels quite safe in comparison. I design screens for clients who already know what they want, so I don't often get the chance to make the bigger decisions about what a product should actually be. Spending forty-eight hours doing exactly that, under time pressure, with strangers judging the result - that sounds like a real test, and one I'd genuinely like to take.

There's also a slightly selfish reason. The winning teams get introduced to a few start-ups in Saigon, and even reaching the final can get you noticed. But honestly, what I want most is to find out whether I'm as good as I think I am once there's no client brief telling me what to design.

289 words · about 2 minutes

Why this band

FC“which I think is the most interesting part” — This relative clause is attached to a factual description of what winning teams do — talk to vendors, build around what they hear — turning the plain description into a personal, evaluative aside without breaking the flow of the sentence. A 6.5 answer would likely state the fact and stop, or add the evaluation as a separate sentence; a 7.5 answer might integrate this judgment even more centrally as the sentence's main point. This kind of brief, appended evaluation on top of factual detail is exactly the fuller development 7.0 rewards, distinguishing genuine engagement from simple reporting.
LR“under time pressure” — The natural collocation 'under time pressure' is a flexible, topic-appropriate phrase slightly beyond the plainest vocabulary, matching the Band 7.0 target.
GRA“so I don't often get the chance to make the bigger decisions about what a product should actually be” — A result clause introduced by 'so' follows directly after an already-complex relative clause ('clients who already know what they want'), stacking two levels of subordination — cause via the relative clause, effect via 'so' — inside a single accurate sentence. A 6.5 answer would likely present the client description and the missed opportunity as two separate plain sentences; a 7.5 answer might restructure this into a more marked construction, like a cleft emphasising what's missing. This layered but accurate structure is the comfortable complexity 7.0 targets, capturing exactly why the hackathon appeals.

Band 7.5

The 7.5 answer ends with the confident, understated line 'that's a test I'd like to pass', a reflective payoff built on a wider range of complex structures earlier in the answer, characteristic of Band 7.5.

The competition I'd really like to enter is a 48-hour design hackathon called the Vietnam Design Jam. It's held every November in Ho Chi Minh City, usually in a co-working space in District 1, and teams of three get a brief on Friday evening — last year it was something like "help street vendors manage their money" — and have until Sunday afternoon to turn it into a working app prototype.

To win, you don't just need pretty screens. The judges are a mix of product people and investors, and they score you on whether the idea would survive contact with real users, how usable the prototype is, and how well you present it in a five-minute pitch. Teams that win usually go out on Saturday morning and actually talk to vendors, then build around what they hear. That's the part I find exciting.

I've followed it for three years without entering, and to be honest the reason is that my day job is quite safe. I design screens for clients who already know what they want, so I rarely get to make the big decisions about what a product should be. Forty-eight hours of doing exactly that, under pressure, with strangers judging it — that's a test I'd like to pass.

There's also a slightly selfish motive. The winning teams get introduced to a couple of Saigon start-ups, and even the finalists get noticed. But mostly I want to find out whether I'm as good as I think I am when there's no client brief to hide behind.

259 words · about 2 minutes

Why this band

LR“survive contact with real users” — The phrase borrows the military idiom 'doesn't survive contact with the enemy' and repurposes it for product design, replacing 'enemy' with 'real users,' a precise, slightly witty collocation rather than a plain statement like 'the idea needs to actually work for users.' Using an adapted idiom this way, naturally and without over-explaining the reference, is the 'figurative or idiomatic touch if it fits the moment' the Band 7.5 lexical target rewards, well beyond the safer, more literal vocabulary a 7.0 answer would choose. It also signals the speaker's professional fluency in design and product thinking, reinforcing the credibility of the argument that follows.
GRA“Teams that win usually go out on Saturday morning and actually talk to vendors, then build around what they hear.” — The relative clause 'that win' narrows the subject before a chain of three coordinated verb phrases — 'go out,' 'talk to vendors,' 'build around what they hear' — describing their process in sequence, packing a full mini-narrative of the winning strategy into one sentence. That combination of a defining relative clause with a chained action sequence is the varied grammatical range the Band 7.5 target rewards, compared to the simpler listed sentences a 7.0 answer might use for the same content. The specificity of the sequence also makes an abstract claim about what makes teams successful concrete and actionable.
FC“that's a test I'd like to pass” — The metaphor of the hackathon as a personal 'test' reframes the whole preceding explanation — about judging criteria and winning strategies — as ultimately being about the speaker's own self-assessment rather than the competition itself. That kind of short, confident closing line, converting factual description into a personal stake, is the reflective payoff the Band 7.5 coherence target rewards over a flatter ending like 'I would like to enter this competition.' Its brevity after a longer explanatory paragraph also gives the ending real punch, echoing the earlier admission that the speaker's day job rarely lets them 'make the big decisions.'

How this card was asked, by exam period

Describe a competition, for example music, cooking, or sport, you would like to take part inMay–Aug 2026

Part 3 follow-up questions

These are the discussion questions examiners asked after this cue card. Sample answers are shown where available.

1. Can new ideas that allow a society to move forward only be generated in a competitive atmosphere?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain listing of pros and cons and the simple closing sentence 'Only using competition often creates many similar versions of the same thing'.
No, I do not think competition is the only way to create new ideas. For example, many tools I use every day, like open-source icon libraries and plugins in my design software, were made by people working together for free, just because they wanted it to exist. Competition can be good because it makes things faster and pushes people to finish their work, but it can also make teams hide their ideas from each other. I think the best situation is a mix of both, people compete to find the best idea, then share it once it works. Only using competition often creates many similar versions of the same thing.
Why this band
FC“I think the best situation is a mix of both” — This sentence states the balanced view plainly using the basic phrase 'a mix of both', with no more figurative framing. A 7.0 answer would restate this as 'The best environments I've seen combine the two', a slightly more natural collocation, and a 7.5 answer would use the verb 'blend' for extra variety.
LR“hide their ideas” — This is a plain, basic verb phrase describing secrecy. A 7.0 answer would use the more precise 'hide their work and duplicate effort', and a 7.5 answer would use the stronger word 'breeds secrecy' for extra vividness.
GRA“many tools I use every day, like open-source icon libraries and plugins in my design software, were made by people working together for free” — This sentence uses a passive construction with a fairly plain participial phrase, 'people working together for free'. A 7.0 answer would replace this with the more natural 'built by people cooperating for nothing', and a 7.5 answer would add the reflective purpose clause 'purely because they wanted the thing to exist'.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the vivid opening metaphor 'competition is the only engine' and the balanced 'but' contrast within a single sentence, 'Competition is good at speed... but it also makes teams hide their work'.
No, I don't think competition is the only engine, though it's a powerful one, I'd say. A lot of the tools I use every day, like the open-source icon libraries and plugins in my design software, were built by people cooperating for nothing, simply because they wanted the thing to exist. Competition is good at speed and at forcing people to commit, but it also makes teams hide their work and duplicate effort. The best environments I've seen combine the two, people compete to have the best idea, then share it once it's proven. Pure competition tends to produce a lot of slightly different versions of the same thing.
Why this band
FC“The best environments I've seen combine the two” — This sentence uses the more precise verb 'combine' and the noun 'environments' rather than the plainer 'situation' and 'mix' used at 6.5, showing slightly wider vocabulary control.
LR“duplicate effort” — This is a more precise, moderately formal collocation than the plain 'hide their ideas' used at 6.5, naming a second specific consequence rather than repeating the same idea.
GRA“Competition is good at speed and at forcing people to commit, but it also makes teams hide their work and duplicate effort.” — This sentence uses two parallel prepositional phrases ('at speed and at forcing people to commit') before the 'but' contrast, a more balanced and controlled structure than the plain listing sentence at 6.5. A 6.5 answer would state the two benefits and two drawbacks as separate loosely joined ideas.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the vivid verb 'breeds secrecy' and the closing idiomatic image 'the same wheel', an allusion that replaces the plainer 'the same thing' used at lower bands.
No, competition isn't the only engine of progress, though it's undeniably a powerful one. A great many tools I rely on daily, the open-source icon libraries and plugins built into my design software, were assembled by people cooperating for nothing, purely because they wanted the thing to exist. Competition excels at generating speed and forcing commitment, but it also breeds secrecy, teams hoarding their work and duplicating each other's effort. The best environments I've encountered blend the two, people compete to land the strongest idea, then share it once it's proven itself. Pure competition, left unchecked, tends to churn out a dozen slightly different versions of the same wheel.
Why this band
FC“but it also breeds secrecy, teams hoarding their work and duplicating each other's effort” — This sentence personifies competition as something that 'breeds' an outcome, followed by an absolute construction ('teams hoarding...') instead of a second finite verb, a more literary and compact structure than the plain coordinated clause at 7.0. A 6.5 answer would state this idea with the simplest coordinated verb phrase, 'hide their ideas from each other'.
LR“breeds secrecy” — This is a vivid, personifying verb choice describing an abstract consequence, considerably more distinctive than the plainer 'makes teams hide their work' used at 7.0.
GRA“left unchecked, tends to churn out a dozen slightly different versions of the same wheel” — This sentence opens with a participial phrase ('left unchecked') and ends with the idiomatic allusion 'the same wheel' (echoing 'reinventing the wheel'), a compact and idiomatic construction. A 7.0 answer would use the plainer 'tends to produce a lot of slightly different versions of the same thing', and a 6.5 answer would state this with the simplest possible wording.
2. Can people learn to be competitive?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain narrative structure and the simple closing contrast 'Some people find this easy, and others never do'.
Yes, I think people can learn to be competitive, but only up to a point. The trigger is usually finding something you really care about winning. For example, I used to run alone on My Khe Beach for years and never cared about my speed. Then I joined a small running group where everyone compared their times, and within a month, I was checking my watch every kilometre. My personality did not really change, but the situation did. I think it is harder to learn how to enjoy losing, which is actually what keeps competitive people going. Some people find this easy, and others never do.
Why this band
FC“My personality did not really change, but the situation did.” — This sentence states a plain contrast using the basic connector 'but', with the second clause built on ellipsis of the verb 'change'. A 7.0 answer would use the sharper, more compressed 'Nothing about my personality changed, the context did', and a 7.5 answer would add the adverb 'simply' for extra emphasis.
LR“really care about” — This is a plain, generic verb phrase for motivation. A 7.0 answer would restate this as 'a competitive streak that only shows up in the right setting', a more abstract and idiomatic construction, and a 7.5 answer would use the precise adjective 'latent' before 'competitive streak'.
GRA“I used to run alone on My Khe Beach for years and never cared about my speed” — This sentence coordinates two ideas with 'and' in a fairly plain structure. A 7.0 answer would restate this using the more formal 'with no interest in speed', and a 7.5 answer would insert this same phrase as a fronted adverbial interruption for extra flexibility.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the compressed contrastive sentence 'Nothing about my personality changed, the context did' and the cleft construction 'What's harder to learn is the temperament to enjoy losing'.
Yes, to a point, and the trigger is usually finding something you care about winning, I'd say. I ran alone on My Khe Beach for years with no interest in speed, and then I joined a small group where everyone compared times, and within a month I was checking my watch every kilometre. Nothing about my personality changed, the context did. I think most people have a competitive streak that only shows up in the right setting. What's harder to learn is the temperament to enjoy losing, which is really what sustains competitive people. Some people find that easy and some never do.
Why this band
FC“Nothing about my personality changed, the context did.” — This sentence uses ellipsis of the verb 'changed' in the second clause, joined with only a comma rather than a connector, a more compact and confident structure than the 6.5 version's 'did not really change, but the situation did'. A 6.5 answer would keep the connector 'but' and the softer 'did not really change'.
LR“a competitive streak” — This is a moderately idiomatic noun phrase describing an underlying trait, more distinctive than the plain 'really care about' used at 6.5.
GRA“What's harder to learn is the temperament to enjoy losing, which is really what sustains competitive people.” — This sentence uses a cleft construction ('What's harder to learn is...') followed by a relative clause, a more advanced structure than the plain statement at 6.5. A 6.5 answer would state this idea more directly as 'I think it is harder to learn how to enjoy losing, which is actually what keeps competitive people going', without the cleft opening.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the fronted adverbial interruption 'utterly indifferent to speed' and the semicolon-linked closing sentence, 'Some find that easy; others never quite manage it', a more compact structure than the 7.0 version's 'and'.
Yes, up to a point, and the trigger tends to be stumbling on something you actually care about winning. I ran alone along My Khe Beach for years, utterly indifferent to speed, until I joined a small group where everyone compared times, and within a month I was checking my watch every kilometre. Nothing about my personality had shifted, the context simply had. Most people, I suspect, carry a latent competitive streak that only surfaces in the right setting. What's genuinely harder to cultivate is the temperament to enjoy losing, which is really what keeps competitive people in the game long-term. Some find that easy; others never quite manage it.
Why this band
FC“I ran alone along My Khe Beach for years, utterly indifferent to speed, until I joined a small group” — This sentence inserts the participial phrase 'utterly indifferent to speed' between the main clause and the 'until' clause, a fronted adverbial interruption that adds flexibility not seen at lower bands. A 7.0 answer would place the similar phrase 'with no interest in speed' immediately after the verb rather than as an interruption, and a 6.5 answer would use a separate coordinated clause instead.
LR“a latent competitive streak” — This phrase adds the precise, less-common adjective 'latent' to the noun phrase, a more sophisticated modifier than the bare noun phrase used at 7.0.
GRA“Some find that easy; others never quite manage it.” — This closing sentence uses a semicolon to join two short, balanced clauses instead of the coordinating 'and' used at 7.0, a tighter and more literary structure. A 6.5 answer would use the plainest coordination, 'Some people find this easy, and others never do'.
3. What popular competitions can ordinary people take part in?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain listing structure across several sentences and the simple closing observation 'winning one does not feel as special anymore'.
Actually, quite a lot, and there are more every year. In Da Nang, there is a big fun run every summer that anyone can join, and during Tet, many neighbourhoods have cooking or flower-arranging contests that people take very seriously. Online, there are photography challenges, quiz apps, and dance challenges on TikTok, which are really competitions too. Companies also organise sales contests and hackathons for their workers. What has changed is that it is now very easy to join, you do not need to be selected or trained. But because there are so many competitions now, winning one does not feel as special anymore.
Why this band
FC“But because there are so many competitions now, winning one does not feel as special anymore.” — This closing sentence uses the basic connector 'because' to state a plain cause and effect. A 7.0 answer would restate this as 'The downside is that with so many, winning any single one doesn't mean very much any more', and a 7.5 answer would use the more formal word 'diluted' for a more precise image.
LR“take very seriously” — This is a plain, basic verb phrase. A 7.0 answer would use the more natural 'taken surprisingly seriously', adding a precise intensifying adverb, and a 7.5 answer keeps a very similar phrase within a more literary sentence.
GRA“What has changed is that it is now very easy to join, you do not need to be selected or trained.” — This sentence uses a cleft construction ('What has changed is that...') followed by a comma-joined clause, a fairly plain structure overall. A 7.0 answer would restate the second half using the more precise 'the barrier is low', and a 7.5 answer would compress this into two short verbless fragments.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the natural spoken opener 'Quite a lot, actually' and the reflective clause 'which are competitions whether people admit it or not', adding nuance beyond a plain list.
Quite a lot, actually, and more each year, I'd say. In Da Nang there's a big fun run every summer that anyone can join, and at Tết most neighbourhoods run cooking or flower-arranging contests that are taken surprisingly seriously. Online, there are photography challenges, quiz apps and the endless dance challenges on TikTok, which are competitions whether people admit it or not. Workplaces run sales contests and hackathons too. What's changed is that the barrier is low, you don't need to be selected or trained to enter most of these. The downside is that with so many, winning any single one doesn't mean very much any more.
Why this band
FC“which are competitions whether people admit it or not” — This trailing relative clause with a concessive tag adds a reflective, slightly playful observation onto the list, rather than simply ending the sentence. A 6.5 answer would end the equivalent sentence plainly with 'which are really competitions too', with no such playful concession.
LR“the barrier is low” — This phrase uses the more abstract, precise noun 'barrier' rather than the vaguer 'it is now very easy to join' used at 6.5.
GRA“What's changed is that the barrier is low, you don't need to be selected or trained to enter most of these.” — This sentence uses a cleft construction with a more compact second clause than the 6.5 version, replacing 'it is now very easy to join' with the tighter abstract noun phrase 'the barrier is low'. A 6.5 answer keeps the plainer, more roundabout phrasing throughout.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the idiomatic phrase 'competitions in all but name' and the verbless closing fragments 'no selection process, no training required', a compact structure replacing full finite clauses.
Quite a lot, actually, and the list keeps growing every year. In Da Nang there's a big fun run every summer open to anyone, and around Tết most neighbourhoods host cooking or flower-arranging contests taken far more seriously than you'd expect. Online, there are photography challenges, quiz apps, and the endless parade of dance challenges on TikTok, competitions in all but name. Workplaces, too, run sales contests and hackathons. What's genuinely shifted is how low the barrier to entry has become, no selection process, no training required. The trade-off is that with contests this abundant, winning any single one has been rather diluted of meaning.
Why this band
FC“competitions in all but name” — This idiomatic phrase (meaning something is effectively a competition even without being labelled one) is a more sophisticated construction than the plainer relative clause 'which are competitions whether people admit it or not' used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer states this idea with the simplest possible wording, 'which are really competitions too'.
LR“has been rather diluted of meaning” — This is a vivid, less-common collocation ('diluted of meaning') describing how winning has lost significance, considerably more distinctive than the plainer 'doesn't mean very much any more' used at 7.0.
GRA“no selection process, no training required” — This is a pair of verbless parallel fragments replacing the finite clause 'you don't need to be selected or trained' used at 7.0, a more compact and confident structure. A 6.5 answer would use the fullest, plainest version of this clause with a complete subject and verb.
4. Why do some parents not allow their young children to take part in competitive activities nowadays?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain narrative example and the simple closing explanation 'they do not want that for their own kids', stated directly without reflection.
I think many parents have seen competition cause problems for children, so they try to protect them. For example, a colleague of mine took her seven-year-old son out of piano contests after she saw him crying over coming second place. She felt he was starting to fear music instead of loving it. Also, many parents today believe children feel confident when they feel safe, not when they are ranked against others. Some parents may also remember their own childhood, when they were always compared to other children, and they do not want that for their own kids.
Why this band
FC“so they try to protect them.” — This short closing clause states the motivation plainly using the basic verb 'try to protect', without any deeper interpretation. A 7.0 answer would restate this as 'decided it's not worth the risk', a more idiomatic and confident phrase, and a 7.5 answer would use the stronger phrase 'inflict real damage'.
LR“fear music instead of loving it” — This is a plain contrastive phrase using basic vocabulary. A 7.0 answer would restate this with the infinitive contrast 'to fear music rather than love it', and a 7.5 answer keeps a similar structure with the added participle 'convinced'.
GRA“she saw him crying over coming second place” — This is a short, simple past-tense clause with a gerund complement. A 7.0 answer would restate this with the more vivid 'seeing him in tears over second place', and a 7.5 answer would use the passive construction 'reduced to tears' for extra intensity.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the natural closing tag 'honestly' and the reflective final sentence 'Whether protecting children from all competition actually prepares them for adult life is another question', which opens up a further nuance.
I think many have watched competition do damage and decided it's not worth the risk, honestly. A colleague of mine took her seven-year-old out of piano contests after seeing him in tears over second place, she felt he was learning to fear music rather than love it. There's also a broader shift in parenting, a lot of parents now believe confidence comes from feeling safe, not from being ranked, and there's plenty of research they can point to. I'd add that some are reacting against their own childhoods, which in Vietnam often involved being compared with the neighbours' kids constantly. Whether protecting children from all competition actually prepares them for adult life is another question.
Why this band
FC“Whether protecting children from all competition actually prepares them for adult life is another question.” — This closing sentence uses a subject clause beginning with 'Whether...' as the grammatical subject, raising a further reflective question rather than simply concluding, a more advanced move than a flat final statement. A 6.5 answer would not raise this further question at all, ending instead with the simple explanation about not wanting the same childhood for their kids.
LR“in tears over second place” — This is a more vivid, idiomatic phrase than the plain 'crying over coming second place' used at 6.5, compressing the idea into a tighter prepositional phrase.
GRA“she felt he was learning to fear music rather than love it” — This sentence uses a parallel infinitive contrast ('to fear... rather than love') joined without 'instead of', a more compact and idiomatic construction than the plain contrastive phrase at 6.5. A 6.5 answer would use the simpler connector 'instead of' with a gerund.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the vivid opening verb phrase 'inflict real damage' and the passive construction 'reduced to tears', both more intense and image-based than the plainer verbs used at lower bands.
I suspect many parents have simply watched competition inflict real damage and decided it isn't worth the gamble. A colleague of mine pulled her seven-year-old out of piano contests after seeing him reduced to tears over second place, convinced he was learning to fear music rather than love it. There's a wider shift in parenting too, plenty now believe confidence stems from feeling safe rather than from being ranked, and there's no shortage of research to back that up. I'd also wager some are reacting against their own upbringing, which in Vietnam often meant being endlessly measured against the neighbours' kids. Whether shielding children from all competition genuinely prepares them for adult life is a rather different question.
Why this band
FC“I suspect many parents have simply watched competition inflict real damage and decided it isn't worth the gamble.” — This opening uses the reflective verb 'suspect' and the vivid phrase 'inflict real damage', a more confident and image-based opener than the plainer version at 7.0, which uses the safer 'watched competition do damage'.
LR“reduced to tears” — This is a vivid, passive idiomatic phrase describing the child's distress, more intense and literary than the plainer 'in tears over second place' used at 7.0.
GRA“convinced he was learning to fear music rather than love it” — This sentence replaces the finite clause 'she felt' with the past participle 'convinced', standing alone as a compact modifier of the subject, a more literary construction than the full clause used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer would use the plainest finite clause, 'She felt he was starting to fear music instead of loving it'.
5. What types of jobs is it useful to be competitive in?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain listed examples of job types and the simple closing summary 'So competition is good when winning and doing the job well are the same thing'.
I think being competitive is useful in jobs where results can be measured easily, like sales, sport, law, or start-ups. At my studio, the two people who find new clients really enjoy having targets and rankings, and it makes them work better. But it is not so useful in jobs that need teamwork or careful thinking. For example, when designers compete with each other, we start protecting our own ideas instead of making them better together. Also, a surgeon who is too competitive about speed could actually be dangerous. So competition is good when winning and doing the job well are the same thing.
Why this band
FC“So competition is good when winning and doing the job well are the same thing.” — This closing sentence states the conclusion plainly with the basic verb 'is good', without addressing the opposite case. A 7.0 answer would extend this into a fuller balanced sentence, 'it's useful where winning and doing the job well are the same thing, and harmful where they come apart', and a 7.5 answer would use the more abstract verb 'diverge'.
LR“find new clients” — This is a plain, literal job description. A 7.0 answer would use the more precise, professional term 'handling client acquisition', and a 7.5 answer would use the similar phrase 'running client acquisition'.
GRA“the two people who find new clients really enjoy having targets and rankings, and it makes them work better” — This sentence joins two clauses with 'and' in a fairly plain structure. A 7.0 answer would restate the second half as 'and it makes them better at their jobs', a slightly tighter phrase, and a 7.5 answer would compress this into the adjective phrase 'visibly sharpened by them'.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the fronted noun phrase opener 'Jobs where the output is measurable and the market is crowded' and the balanced closing sentence contrasting 'useful' and 'harmful' in one structure.
Jobs where the output is measurable and the market is crowded, sales, most obviously, plus sport, law, and start-ups, I'd say. At my studio, the two people handling client acquisition genuinely thrive on targets and leaderboards, and it makes them better at their jobs. It's much less useful in jobs that depend on collaboration or careful judgement, though. When designers compete with each other, we start protecting our ideas instead of improving them, and a surgeon or an air-traffic controller who's competitive about speed is frankly dangerous. So it's useful where winning and doing the job well are the same thing, and harmful where they come apart.
Why this band
FC“So it's useful where winning and doing the job well are the same thing, and harmful where they come apart.” — This closing sentence uses two parallel 'where' clauses joined by 'and' to state both sides of the contrast in one balanced sentence, rather than stopping at only the positive case as the 6.5 answer does. A 6.5 answer would end with only the first half of this contrast.
LR“handling client acquisition” — This is a more precise, professional collocation than the plain 'find new clients' used at 6.5, sounding like an established job title rather than a literal description.
GRA“Jobs where the output is measurable and the market is crowded, sales, most obviously, plus sport, law, and start-ups, I'd say.” — This sentence opens with a relative clause functioning as the subject ('Jobs where...'), followed by an appositive list using the informal connector 'plus', a more advanced opening structure than a plain declarative sentence. A 6.5 answer would open with the standard 'I think being competitive is useful in jobs where...'.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the participial closing phrase 'visibly sharpened by them' and the abstract verb pair 'coincide' and 'diverge', which replace the plainer 'are the same thing' and 'come apart' used at 7.0.
Jobs where the output is easily measured and the market is crowded, sales, most obviously, alongside sport, law and start-ups. At my studio, the two people running client acquisition genuinely thrive on targets and leaderboards, visibly sharpened by them. It's markedly less useful, though, in roles hinging on collaboration or careful judgement. When designers compete against each other, we end up guarding our ideas rather than refining them together, and a surgeon or air-traffic controller chasing speed for its own sake is frankly a liability. So competitiveness pays off wherever winning and doing the job well happen to coincide, and turns harmful the moment they diverge.
Why this band
FC“visibly sharpened by them” — This participial phrase, attached after a comma with no repeated subject, replaces the finite clause 'and it makes them better at their jobs' used at 7.0, a more compact and literary construction. A 6.5 answer would use the plainest finite clause, 'and it makes them work better'.
LR“a liability” — This is a vivid, precise noun used metaphorically to describe a dangerously competitive surgeon or controller, considerably more distinctive than the plain adjective 'dangerous' used at 6.5 and 7.0.
GRA“So competitiveness pays off wherever winning and doing the job well happen to coincide, and turns harmful the moment they diverge.” — This closing sentence uses the abstract noun 'competitiveness' as its subject and the precise verbs 'coincide' and 'diverge' instead of the plainer 'are the same thing' and 'come apart' used at 7.0, a more formal and compact register. A 6.5 answer would end with only half of this balanced contrast, using the simplest possible wording.
6. Should people continue competing even if they keep being unsuccessful?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain chronological narrative about the illustrator and the simple closing summary 'So persistence is good, but only if you keep learning from it'.
I think it depends on the reason why they keep losing. For example, an illustrator friend of mine entered the same national poster competition for five years. She did not win anything for four years, but finally came second in the fifth year. Every year, her work got better because she studied the winning designs. That kind of losing is actually a slow way of learning. But if someone keeps failing and does not change anything, I think they should stop and think about whether their goal is right. So persistence is good, but only if you keep learning from it.
Why this band
FC“So persistence is good, but only if you keep learning from it.” — This closing sentence uses the basic connector 'but' to state a plain condition, without any more idiomatic framing. A 7.0 answer would restate this as 'persistence is admirable up to the point where it stops teaching you anything', a more precise and confident phrasing, and a 7.5 answer would use the verb 'deserves admiration' for a slightly more formal register.
LR“a slow way of learning” — This is a plain, basic noun phrase. A 7.0 answer would restate this more compactly as 'just slow learning', and a 7.5 answer would extend this idea with 'slow learning in disguise', a more vivid, idiomatic phrase.
GRA“Every year, her work got better because she studied the winning designs.” — This is a simple causal sentence in plain past-tense structure. A 7.0 answer would embed this idea directly into the main sentence about the competition using 'each year her work was visibly better because she'd studied the winners', and a 7.5 answer would compress this further into an absolute construction.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the rhetorical minimal-pair contrast 'they're not competing, they're repeating' and the closing sentence 'persistence is admirable up to the point where it stops teaching you anything', a more precise final judgement.
It depends on why they're losing, I'd say. An illustrator friend of mine entered the same national poster competition five years in a row, came nowhere four times, and finally placed second, and each year her work was visibly better because she'd studied the winners. That kind of losing is just slow learning. But if someone keeps failing and isn't changing anything, they're not competing, they're repeating, and at some point the honest move is to step back and ask whether the goal is right. I'd say persistence is admirable up to the point where it stops teaching you anything.
Why this band
FC“they're not competing, they're repeating” — This sentence uses a parallel minimal-pair contrast (two words that rhyme and share a root, 'competing' and 'repeating') for rhetorical effect, a more sophisticated device than a plain factual statement. A 6.5 answer would state this idea plainly as 'if someone keeps failing and does not change anything, I think they should stop', with no such wordplay.
LR“just slow learning” — This is a more compact and confident phrase than the fuller 'a slow way of learning' used at 6.5, dropping the article for a punchier, more idiomatic register.
GRA“An illustrator friend of mine entered the same national poster competition five years in a row, came nowhere four times, and finally placed second, and each year her work was visibly better because she'd studied the winners.” — This long sentence coordinates four clauses with commas and 'and', embedding the improvement detail directly into the narrative rather than as a separate sentence, a more advanced single-sentence structure than the 6.5 version's two separate sentences.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the absolute construction 'her work visibly sharper each year' replacing a finite clause, and the idiomatic closing phrase 'slow learning in disguise', more vivid than the plainer versions at lower bands.
It hinges entirely on why they keep losing. An illustrator friend of mine entered the same national poster competition five years running, came nowhere four times, and finally placed second, her work visibly sharper each year because she'd been quietly studying the winners all along. That sort of losing is really just slow learning in disguise. But someone who keeps failing without changing a single variable isn't competing, they're repeating, and at some point the honest move is stepping back to question whether the goal itself is even right. Persistence, I'd argue, deserves admiration only up to the point it stops teaching you anything.
Why this band
FC“It hinges entirely on why they keep losing.” — This opening uses the more precise verb 'hinges' plus the intensifier 'entirely', a more confident and formal opener than the plainer 'It depends on why they're losing' used at 7.0.
LR“slow learning in disguise” — This is a vivid, idiomatic extension of the phrase used at 7.0, adding the figurative tag 'in disguise' for a more literary, memorable image, considerably more distinctive than the plain 'a slow way of learning' used at 6.5.
GRA“her work visibly sharper each year because she'd been quietly studying the winners all along” — This clause uses an absolute construction (noun plus adjective, 'her work visibly sharper') instead of a finite verb like 'was', a more compact and literary structure than the finite clause used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer would use the plainest finite sentence, 'Every year, her work got better because she studied the winning designs'.
7. What type of person likes to take part in competitions?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain listing of different personality types and the simple closing statement 'I think truly competitive people are actually rarer than you might think'.
The obvious answer is confident and ambitious people, but I have noticed something simpler, people who need deadlines from outside themselves. My friend Khanh joins almost every competition he sees, like photography, coding, and even a cocktail contest once, but he is not really that confident. He just cannot finish things without a deadline, and competitions give him one. There are also people who like being measured and find rankings comforting instead of stressful. Some people join just for the community, because a competition is a good reason to spend time with people who like the same thing. I think truly competitive people are actually rarer than you might think.
Why this band
FC“I think truly competitive people are actually rarer than you might think.” — This closing sentence states the reflective conclusion plainly using the basic phrase 'I think', without any more idiomatic framing. A 7.0 answer would restate this with the dropped subject phrase 'The genuinely combative type, honestly, is rarer than you'd think', and a 7.5 answer would use the more formal verb 'assume' at the end.
LR“confident and ambitious” — This is a plain, basic pair of adjectives describing the obvious stereotype. A 7.0 answer would restate this with the noun phrase 'confident, ambitious people', a nearly identical but slightly more formal structure, and a 7.5 answer would use 'confident, ambitious types', a more idiomatic register.
GRA“He just cannot finish things without a deadline, and competitions give him one.” — This sentence joins two clauses with 'and' in a plain coordinated structure. A 7.0 answer would restate this using the more idiomatic 'He just can't finish anything without a date on it, and a contest conveniently supplies one', and a 7.5 answer would use the verb 'throws himself at' to describe Khanh's behaviour elsewhere in the sentence.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the precise abstract phrase 'people who need external deadlines' and the closing tag 'honestly' inserted before the final judgement.
The obvious answer is confident, ambitious people, but I've noticed it's often something simpler, people who need external deadlines. My friend Khánh enters every competition he sees, photography, coding, even a cocktail contest once, and he's not especially confident. He just can't finish anything without a date on it, and competitions give him one. Then there are people who enjoy being measured, who find a ranking reassuring rather than stressful. And a smaller group who mainly want the community, because a contest is an excuse to spend a weekend with people who care about the same thing. The genuinely combative type, honestly, is rarer than you'd think.
Why this band
FC“The genuinely combative type, honestly, is rarer than you'd think.” — This closing sentence uses the more precise, less common adjective 'combative' and inserts the natural spoken tag 'honestly' mid-clause, a more fluent and idiomatic structure than the plain 6.5 closing sentence. A 6.5 answer would end with the plainer phrase 'truly competitive people are actually rarer than you might think'.
LR“external deadlines” — This is a more precise, formal collocation than the vaguer 'deadlines from outside themselves' used at 6.5, compressing the same idea into a tighter noun phrase.
GRA“He just can't finish anything without a date on it, and competitions give him one.” — This sentence uses the more idiomatic phrase 'a date on it' instead of the plainer 'a deadline' used at 6.5, and the contracted form 'can't' for a natural spoken register. A 6.5 answer would use the plainer noun 'deadline' directly.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the vivid opening verb 'throws himself at' and the closing absolute construction 'a contest being little more than an excuse...', a more literary structure than a finite relative clause.
The obvious answer is confident, ambitious types, but I've come to suspect it's often something plainer, people who simply need an external deadline. My friend Khánh throws himself at every competition he stumbles across, photography, coding, even a cocktail contest once, and he's hardly the confident sort. He just can't finish anything without a date attached, and a contest conveniently supplies one. Then there are those who genuinely enjoy being measured, finding a ranking reassuring rather than stressful. And a smaller cohort who are chiefly there for the community, a contest being little more than an excuse to spend a weekend among people who care about the same obscure thing. The truly combative type, I'd wager, is rarer than most assume.
Why this band
FC“throws himself at every competition he stumbles across” — This is a vivid, idiomatic verb phrase describing Khánh's enthusiasm, considerably more distinctive than the plain 'joins almost every competition he sees' used at 6.5 and the similarly plain 'enters every competition he sees' at 7.0.
LR“hardly the confident sort” — This is a moderately idiomatic phrase using the noun 'sort' to describe personality type, more distinctive than the plainer 'not especially confident' used at 7.0.
GRA“a contest being little more than an excuse to spend a weekend among people who care about the same obscure thing” — This clause uses an absolute construction ('a contest being...') instead of a finite verb like 'is', a more compact and literary structure than the plain finite clause used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer would use the plainest finite construction, 'a competition is a good reason to spend time with people who like the same thing'.
8. Is it always a good idea to encourage competition at work?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain narrative example about the bonus scheme and the simple closing statement 'is usually a bad idea', with no further nuance.
No, I do not think so, and I have seen it go wrong before. A previous company I worked at gave a bonus to whoever got the most client approvals for their designs. Within a month, people stopped giving each other honest feedback, because helping a colleague meant helping a rival. The quality of the work actually got worse, even though everyone was working harder. I think competition is fine when it is aimed at other companies, or when it is just for fun with low stakes. But making colleagues compete with each other, when they need to work together every day, is usually a bad idea.
Why this band
FC“No, I do not think so, and I have seen it go wrong before.” — This opening states the position plainly using the basic phrase 'do not think so', without any more idiomatic framing. A 7.0 answer would restate this more concisely as 'No, and I've seen it go wrong', and a 7.5 answer would use the more vivid 'I watched it backfire firsthand'.
LR“got worse” — This is a plain, basic verb phrase describing the decline in quality. A 7.0 answer would use the identical phrase 'dropped', a slightly more precise verb, and a 7.5 answer would use the same verb 'got worse' within a more compressed sentence structure.
GRA“people stopped giving each other honest feedback, because helping a colleague meant helping a rival” — This sentence uses a simple causal clause with 'because' in a fairly plain structure. A 7.0 answer would use the past perfect 'had stopped' to mark sequence more clearly, and a 7.5 answer would replace the literal verb 'helping a rival' with the more vivid metaphor 'arming a rival'.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the past perfect verb 'had stopped', marking a clear sequence of events, and the closing metaphor 'making colleagues into opponents' rather than a flat statement.
No, and I've seen it go wrong. A previous agency I worked at introduced a bonus for whoever's designs got the most client approvals, and within a month people had stopped giving each other honest feedback, because helping a colleague meant helping a rival. The quality of the work dropped even though everyone was working harder. Competition is fine when it's directed outward, at rival companies, or when it's playful and low-stakes. Pointing it inward, between people who need to cooperate every day, is nearly always a mistake. What managers usually want is effort, and there are far better ways to get that than making colleagues into opponents.
Why this band
FC“Pointing it inward, between people who need to cooperate every day, is nearly always a mistake.” — This sentence opens with a gerund phrase ('Pointing it inward') functioning as the subject, a more advanced and compact construction than a plain declarative sentence. A 6.5 answer would state this idea as 'making colleagues compete with each other... is usually a bad idea', using a less formal gerund structure with 'making' instead.
LR“making colleagues into opponents” — This is a moderately vivid metaphorical phrase, more distinctive than the plain 'making colleagues compete with each other' used at 6.5.
GRA“within a month people had stopped giving each other honest feedback, because helping a colleague meant helping a rival” — This sentence uses the past perfect 'had stopped' to clearly mark the sequence relative to the bonus scheme's introduction, a more precise tense choice than the simple past 'stopped' used at 6.5.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the vivid metaphor 'arming a rival' replacing the literal 'helping a rival' and the opening image 'I watched it backfire firsthand', more evocative than the plainer openers at lower bands.
No, and I watched it backfire firsthand. A previous agency I worked at rolled out a bonus for whoever's designs racked up the most client approvals, and within a month people had quietly stopped giving each other honest feedback, since helping a colleague now meant arming a rival. The work actually got worse, despite everyone putting in longer hours. Competition works fine when aimed outward, at rival companies, or kept playful and low-stakes. Turning it inward, among people who need to cooperate daily, is nearly always a misstep. What managers actually want is effort, and there are considerably better ways to extract that than turning colleagues into opponents.
Why this band
FC“No, and I watched it backfire firsthand.” — This opening uses the vivid verb 'backfire' plus the intensifying adverb 'firsthand', a more image-based and confident opener than the plainer 'No, and I've seen it go wrong' used at 7.0.
LR“arming a rival” — This is a vivid, metaphorical verb choice replacing the literal 'helping a rival' used at both 6.5 and 7.0, giving the sentence a sharper, more dramatic edge.
GRA“since helping a colleague now meant arming a rival” — This clause uses the causal connector 'since' instead of 'because', combined with the vivid metaphor 'arming a rival', a slightly more formal and literary register than the plainer causal clause used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer would use the most basic causal connector 'because' with the literal verb 'helping'.
9. Why are competitions on television, such as singing or cooking competitions, becoming popular?
May–Aug 2026
Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question
Band 6.5
This is a 6.5 answer because of its plain listed reasons joined loosely by 'also' and 'But', and the simple closing observation about feeling moved, stated directly.
I think one reason is that these shows always keep you watching, because someone is always about to be eliminated. But I think the bigger reason is that they let normal viewers feel like experts. When I watch a cooking show with my parents, all three of us argue with the judges, and that is actually the fun part for us. These shows are also cheaper to make than dramas, and the contestants provide a lot of real emotion for free. Also, when people watch someone like themselves get a chance to change their life, it feels moving, even if we know the show is made to feel that way.
Why this band
FC“But I think the bigger reason is that they let normal viewers feel like experts.” — This sentence states the main claim plainly using the basic connector 'But', without any more elegant framing device. A 7.0 answer would restate this using the intensifier 'ordinary', and a 7.5 answer would add the precise closing phrase 'for an hour' for extra vividness.
LR“argue with the judges” — This is a plain, literal verb phrase describing family behaviour while watching. A 7.0 answer would use the identical phrase within a more reflective sentence, and a 7.5 answer would use the stronger verb 'squabble with', a more vivid and precise alternative.
GRA“someone is always about to be eliminated” — This is a short, simple passive sentence. A 7.0 answer would restate this using the more idiomatic 'there's always someone about to be eliminated' introduced by 'Partly because', and a 7.5 answer would use the more vivid phrase 'teetering on elimination'.
Band 7.0
This is a 7.0 answer because of the fronted subordinate clause 'in a society where most people feel their lives aren't dramatic' and the reflective closing phrase 'even when you know the format is engineered to produce exactly that feeling'.
Partly because they give you a reason to keep watching, there's always someone about to be eliminated, I'd say. But I think the bigger reason is that they let ordinary viewers feel like experts. When I watch a cooking show with my parents, the three of us argue with the judges constantly, and that participation is really the product. They're also cheap to make compared with drama, and the contestants supply free emotion. There's a cultural angle too, in a society where most people feel their lives aren't dramatic, watching someone like them get a shot at transformation is genuinely moving, even when you know the format is engineered to produce exactly that feeling.
Why this band
FC“There's a cultural angle too” — This short transitional sentence signals a shift to a new, more reflective layer of the argument, a more fluent move than simply adding another item to a list with 'Also'. A 6.5 answer introduces its final point with the plainer 'Also, when people watch someone like themselves...', without this kind of organising transition.
LR“supply free emotion” — This phrase uses the more precise, slightly abstract verb 'supply' rather than the plainer 'provide... for free' used at 6.5.
GRA“in a society where most people feel their lives aren't dramatic, watching someone like them get a shot at transformation is genuinely moving” — This sentence opens with a fronted subordinate clause before the main clause, a more advanced structural choice than starting directly with the main subject as the 6.5 answer does. A 6.5 answer would state this idea starting with 'when people watch someone like themselves get a chance to change their life'.
Band 7.5
This reaches 7.5 through the vivid verb 'teetering on elimination' and the closing image 'squeeze exactly that feeling out of you', which is more visceral than the plainer 'produce exactly that feeling' used at 7.0.
Partly because they hand you a built-in reason to keep watching, there's always someone teetering on elimination. But the bigger draw, I'd argue, is that they let ordinary viewers feel like experts for an hour. Watching a cooking show with my parents, the three of us squabble with the judges relentlessly, and that participation is really the product being sold. They're also considerably cheaper to produce than scripted drama, with contestants supplying the emotional content for free. There's a cultural dimension too, in a society where most people feel their own lives lack drama, watching someone ordinary get a shot at transformation is genuinely moving, even while you know the format is engineered to squeeze exactly that feeling out of you.
Why this band
FC“there's always someone teetering on elimination” — This phrase uses the vivid, precise verb 'teetering' to describe the precariousness of a contestant's position, considerably more distinctive than the plain passive 'is always about to be eliminated' used at 6.5.
LR“squabble with the judges relentlessly” — This is a more vivid, precise verb choice ('squabble') combined with the intensifying adverb 'relentlessly', more distinctive than the plainer 'argue with the judges constantly' used at 7.0.
GRA“even while you know the format is engineered to squeeze exactly that feeling out of you” — This sentence uses the vivid, almost physical verb phrase 'squeeze... out of you', a more visceral and idiomatic construction than the plainer 'produce exactly that feeling' used at 7.0. A 6.5 answer states this idea with the simplest possible wording, 'even if we know the show is made to feel that way'.

Frequently asked questions

How long should my answer to this Part 2 cue card be?: Speak for 1 to 2 minutes. The examiner will stop you at 2 minutes, so aim for roughly 220-300 words that cover every bullet on the card and end with how you feel about it.
What Part 3 questions follow this cue card?: After "A Competition You Would Like to Take Part In", examiners have asked 9 follow-up discussion questions, listed above. They move from your personal story to general opinions on the same theme.
Is this cue card still being used?: It was most recently reported by test-takers in May–Aug 2026. Cue cards rotate every four months, and many topics return in later seasons with slightly different wording.