A Person You Know Who Likes Growing Plants in Their Home or Garden

Part 3 follow-up questions

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

1. 1. Is it common for people to grow plants at home in your country?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct opinion and one simple reason, closing with the plain linking phrase 'So growing plants is a normal part of life here.'

   Yes, it's very common in my country. In Hue, where I grew up, most houses have a small yard or rooftop with kumquat trees, bonsai, and pots of herbs, and people in flats in Da Nang grow plants on their balconies too. I think it's common because herbs are used in almost every meal, so growing them saves money. Plants are also important at Tết, when streets turn into flower markets. So growing plants is a normal part of life here.

   Why this band

   • FC“So growing plants is a normal part of life here.” — This closing sentence uses the simplest possible connector, 'So', to sum up the answer in a single linear step. A 7.0+ answer would instead use a reflective closer like 'so the habit really does run deep', which adds a small evaluative twist rather than just restating the point. It shows coherent but very basic organisation.
   • LR“saves money” — This is a plain, everyday collocation that gets the meaning across without any attempt at precision or nuance. A higher band would likely reach for something like 'make a genuine dent in the grocery bill', which is more vivid and specific. Here the vocabulary is accurate but entirely safe and common.
   • GRA“I think it's common because herbs are used in almost every meal, so growing them saves money.” — This sentence chains two simple clauses together with 'because' and 'so', which is grammatically correct but structurally basic, essentially just cause then effect. A 7.5 answer would likely compress this into a dash-separated explanation or a participial phrase instead of two full linked clauses. It shows accurate but unambitious grammar.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer opens with the natural spoken filler 'Honestly, yes' and adds a mild concessive clause ('even though she has far less space') that shows a touch of reflection beyond a flat statement.

   Honestly, yes — it's common across almost every type of home. Where I grew up in Hue, most houses have a small yard or rooftop crowded with kumquat trees, bonsai, and herb pots, and my neighbour in her Da Nang flat does much the same on her balcony, even though she has far less space. I'd say growing herbs is partly tradition and partly economics, since fresh herbs go into nearly every meal and a few pots save real money. Ornamental plants matter too, especially at Tết, when whole streets turn into flower markets, so the habit really does run deep.

   Why this band

   • FC“Honestly, yes” — This natural spoken opener signals a personal, considered response rather than a rehearsed one, which examiners associate with genuine fluency. A 6.5 answer would more likely open with a flatter 'Yes, it's very common', skipping this conversational framing. It's a small marker but a very typical 7.0 fluency feature.
   • LR“partly tradition and partly economics” — This paired collocation is a step up from a plain word like 'reason', showing the speaker can categorise an idea more precisely. A 6.5 speaker would likely just say 'it's common because', while a 7.5 speaker might push further into a more idiomatic phrase. It sits in the moderately elevated middle ground typical of this band.
   • GRA“even though she has far less space” — This concessive clause adds a mild complexity beyond the plain coordination seen at 6.5, showing the speaker can qualify a claim rather than just state it. It isn't as compact as the participial phrases a 7.5 answer might use, but it does demonstrate controlled subordination. This is a solid example of the 'one moderately complex sentence' expected at this band.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses a fronted structure ('What's newer is the indoor-plant craze...') to pivot the answer and closes with a vivid, idiomatic collocation, 'make a genuine dent in the grocery bill'.

   Very much so, and it cuts across every kind of home. Back in Hue, almost every house has a small yard or rooftop crowded with kumquat trees, bonsai, and pots of herbs, while apartment dwellers in Da Nang, my neighbour among them, make do with the same arrangement squeezed onto a balcony. Growing food plants is partly tradition, partly economics — fresh herbs feature in nearly every meal, and a few pots make a genuine dent in the grocery bill. Ornamental plants carry their own weight too, especially around Tết, when entire streets are transformed into flower markets. What's newer is the indoor-plant craze among young people, driven more by aesthetics than utility, but the underlying habit is old and deep.

   Why this band

   • FC“What's newer is the indoor-plant craze among young people” — This fronted cleft structure signals a deliberate shift in the answer's focus, managing the discourse more elegantly than a plain 'Also, young people like indoor plants now' would. A 6.5 or 7.0 answer would likely introduce this idea with a flatter connector. It shows the kind of flexible topic management examiners reward at the top band.
   • LR“make a genuine dent in the grocery bill” — This is a vivid, mildly idiomatic collocation that goes well beyond the plain 'saves money' a 6.5 answer would use. It shows precise, natural control of everyday spoken idiom rather than textbook vocabulary. This kind of phrase is a clear marker of the 'genuinely less-common word choice' expected at 7.5.
   • GRA“apartment dwellers in Da Nang, my neighbour among them, make do with the same arrangement squeezed onto a balcony” — This sentence compresses two ideas — who does it, and a specific example — into one flowing structure using the appositive 'my neighbour among them' and the participial phrase 'squeezed onto a balcony', instead of two separate clauses. A 7.0 answer would likely split this into a full extra sentence. This compact, flexible grammar is characteristic of the top band.

2. 2. What are the benefits of having plants inside the home?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer opens with the plain listing phrase 'There are several benefits' and gives modest, direct reasons using simple connectors like 'and' and 'because'.

   There are several benefits. I keep a fern on my desk, and watering it makes me feel calm when I'm stressed with work. Plants make a room feel more alive and less empty, and they add a bit of humidity when the air conditioner is on. Looking after a plant is also good for people who live alone, because it gives them something to care for. And it's simply nice to watch something grow.

   Why this band

   • FC“There are several benefits.” — This is a plain, formulaic opener that simply announces the structure of the answer rather than engaging with the question directly. A 7.0 answer would more likely open with a personal reflection like 'Honestly, the measurable benefits are fairly modest'. It's clear and coherent, but organisationally very basic.
   • LR“makes me feel calm” — This is a common, entirely safe adjective-verb combination that conveys the idea clearly but without any particular precision. A 7.5 answer would likely replace this with something more specific and idiomatic, like 'a small pause that actually helps'. It's accurate modest vocabulary typical of this band.
   • GRA“Looking after a plant is also good for people who live alone, because it gives them something to care for.” — This sentence uses a simple because-clause to link cause and effect, which is grammatically correct but structurally plain. A 7.0 answer would likely turn this into a conditional, such as 'if you live alone, caring for something living gives you...'. It shows accurate but unambitious sentence construction.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer adds a mild qualifying remark up front ('the measurable benefits are fairly modest') and closes with the natural hedge 'To be fair, it's a modest benefit, but a genuine one.'

   Honestly, the measurable benefits are fairly modest — a plant or two won't purify the air the way some adverts claim — but the effects you actually feel are real. I keep a fern on my desk, and watering it has become the thing I do when I'm stuck on something, instead of reaching for my phone. Plants also make a room feel calmer and more lived-in, and if you live alone, caring for something living gives you a small sense of responsibility. To be fair, it's a modest benefit, but a genuine one.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, it's a modest benefit, but a genuine one.” — This closing hedge shows the speaker weighing and qualifying their own claim rather than just stating it, which is a natural feature of reflective spoken English. A 6.5 answer would likely end more flatly, without this kind of self-correction. It signals the 'mild qualifying remark' this band is known for.
   • LR“more lived-in” — This is a slightly less common, more evocative word choice than a plain option like 'nicer' or 'cosy', showing a bit more control of natural collocation. A 6.5 answer would likely settle for 'more alive', which is safer but flatter. It isn't as striking as a 7.5 phrase like 'inhabited rather than sterile', but it sits clearly above plain vocabulary.
   • GRA“if you live alone, caring for something living gives you a small sense of responsibility” — This is a real conditional structure, which adds a layer of grammatical complexity beyond the simple because-clause a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea. It isn't as compressed as the semicolon-linked structures a 7.5 answer might produce, but it demonstrates controlled subordination. This is a good example of the 'one moderately complex sentence' expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the compact idiomatic phrase 'an indoor plant doubles as a low-stakes first lesson in responsibility' and manages several points fluidly with the discourse marker 'Beyond that'.

   The measurable benefits are honestly pretty modest — a plant or two isn't going to purify a room the way adverts suggest — but the felt ones are real enough. I keep a fern on my desk, and watering it has become the thing I do when a design is stuck, instead of picking up my phone; it's a small pause that actually helps. Beyond that, plants make a room feel inhabited rather than sterile, they add welcome humidity in air-conditioned flats, and tending something living is quietly good for people who live on their own. For children, an indoor plant doubles as a low-stakes first lesson in responsibility. There's also, simply, the pleasure of watching something grow in a space where nothing else changes.

   Why this band

   • FC“Beyond that,” — This discourse marker smoothly pivots the answer from the personal fern anecdote to a wider list of benefits, managing several distinct points within one coherent flow. A 6.5 or 7.0 answer would more likely just start a new sentence with 'Plants also...'. This kind of flexible signposting is typical of top-band coherence.
   • LR“an indoor plant doubles as a low-stakes first lesson in responsibility” — The collocations 'doubles as' and 'low-stakes' are genuinely less common word choices that convey a precise, slightly witty idea in very few words. A 7.0 answer would likely need a longer, plainer sentence to say the same thing, such as 'it teaches children responsibility without much risk'. This compression and precision is a clear 7.5 marker.
   • GRA“watering it has become the thing I do when a design is stuck, instead of picking up my phone; it's a small pause that actually helps” — This uses a semicolon to fuse two closely related ideas into one flexible unit rather than splitting them into separate sentences, which is a more advanced way of managing complex information. A 7.0 answer would likely present these as two plainer, separate sentences. This compact grammar is characteristic of the top band.

3. 3. Should all children learn how to grow plants?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct opinion, 'Yes, I think all children should try it at least once,' followed by one plain example and simple supporting points.

   Yes, I think all children should try it at least once. In my primary school, we each grew a bean in a plastic cup on the windowsill, and many of my classmates still remember it. Growing a plant teaches children patience and shows them where food actually comes from. It also helps them care more about nature. Not every child needs to love gardening, but everyone should try it once, and a simple cup and a bean is enough.

   Why this band

   • FC“Yes, I think all children should try it at least once.” — This is a direct, unhedged opinion statement placed right at the start, which is clear but leaves no room for nuance. A 7.0 answer would more likely soften this with 'I'd say yes, at least once', adding a layer of natural tentativeness. It's coherent and appropriate, but structurally the simplest possible opening.
   • LR“care more about nature” — This is plain, general vocabulary that gets the point across without any specific imagery. A 7.5 answer would likely replace it with something more vivid, like 'a small attachment to the natural world that might blossom into real care later on'. The word choice here is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“Growing a plant teaches children patience and shows them where food actually comes from.” — This sentence joins two ideas with a simple 'and', producing a compound predicate rather than any subordination. A 7.0 or 7.5 answer would likely add a relative clause or dash to expand on one of these ideas instead of just listing them side by side. It's grammatically correct but structurally basic.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer softens its opinion with 'I'd say yes' and adds the natural qualifying remark 'and to be fair that's fine' when conceding not every child will enjoy it.

   I'd say yes, at least once, and honestly it doesn't need to be anything elaborate. Half my primary-school class still remembers the bean we each grew in a plastic cup on the windowsill, mainly because it was the first time something happened because of us rather than to us. Growing a plant teaches patience and cause and effect, and it shows children where food comes from, which city kids increasingly don't know. Not every child will end up loving it, and to be fair that's fine — the goal isn't to make farmers, just to make sure nobody grows up thinking tomatoes come from a shelf.

   Why this band

   • FC“and honestly it doesn't need to be anything elaborate” — This natural spoken aside, using 'honestly', shows the speaker adding a small personal reflection rather than just stating a bare opinion. A 6.5 answer would likely skip this and move straight to the example. It's a small but clear marker of the conversational fluency expected at 7.0.
   • LR“cause and effect” — This is a moderately elevated fixed collocation, a step up from a plain phrase like 'what happens because of what', showing the speaker can name an abstract idea concisely. A 6.5 answer would likely avoid this term altogether in favour of simpler wording. It isn't as strikingly idiomatic as a 7.5 phrase, but it's clearly above the most basic vocabulary.
   • GRA“something happened because of us rather than to us” — This parallel contrastive structure, balancing 'because of us' against 'to us', is a more sophisticated way of expressing agency than a plain sentence would allow. A 6.5 answer would likely just say 'we did something ourselves' without this kind of built-in contrast. It shows controlled, moderately complex grammar typical of this band.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer closes with the compact evaluative touch 'A cup and a bean, frankly, is enough' and plays on the word 'plants' with 'might blossom into real care later on'.

   Yes, at least once, and it needn't be anything elaborate. Half my primary-school class still remembers the bean we each grew in a plastic cup on the windowsill, simply because it was the first time something happened because of us, not to us. Growing a plant teaches patience, cause and effect, and where food actually comes from — knowledge that city children are increasingly missing out on. It also plants a small attachment to the natural world that might blossom into real care later on. Not every child will take to it, and that's fine; the point isn't to churn out farmers but to ensure nobody reaches adulthood believing tomatoes come from a shelf. A cup and a bean, frankly, is enough.

   Why this band

   • FC“A cup and a bean, frankly, is enough.” — This short, compact closing sentence, with the parenthetical 'frankly' inserted mid-clause, delivers a confident evaluative punchline rather than just restating the position. A 7.0 answer would more likely close with a fuller, plainer sentence. This kind of compressed, flexible closing touch is typical of the top band.
   • LR“plants a small attachment to the natural world that might blossom into real care later on” — This sentence plays deliberately on the words 'plants' and 'blossom', a genuinely less-common and slightly witty piece of wordplay that a 6.5 or 7.0 answer would be unlikely to attempt. It shows a level of lexical control that goes beyond accuracy into style. This kind of idiomatic flourish is a clear 7.5 marker.
   • GRA“nobody reaches adulthood believing tomatoes come from a shelf” — The participial phrase 'believing tomatoes come from a shelf' compresses what would otherwise need a relative clause like 'who believes that tomatoes come from a shelf' into a tighter, more fluent structure. A 7.0 answer would likely use the fuller relative-clause version instead. This compact grammar is characteristic of the top band.

4. 4. Why do some people grow their own fruit and vegetables?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer lists reasons one by one with plain connectors, ending simply with 'And finally, people just enjoy eating something they grew themselves.'

   One big reason is trust. My aunt stopped buying morning glory from the market after a pesticide scare, so now she grows it herself in a plastic tub. Cost is another reason, because growing your own food is cheaper for families with tight budgets. The taste is also better, since a fresh tomato tastes different from one that travelled for days. And finally, people just enjoy eating something they grew themselves.

   Why this band

   • FC“And finally, people just enjoy eating something they grew themselves.” — This closing sentence uses the plainest possible list-ending connector, 'finally', to wrap up the answer. A 7.0 answer would more likely tie the reasons together with a phrase like 'everyone seems to mention the same thing', which shows synthesis rather than just listing. It's clear but structurally the most basic way to close.
   • LR“One big reason is trust.” — This uses the plain, common phrase 'big reason', which is accurate but entirely ordinary vocabulary. A 7.0 answer would more likely phrase this as 'the first reason is often trust', which sounds slightly more natural and considered. The word choice here is correct but unremarkable.
   • GRA“My aunt stopped buying morning glory from the market after a pesticide scare, so now she grows it herself in a plastic tub.” — This sentence links two events with the simple connector 'so', producing a straightforward cause-then-effect structure. A 7.0 answer would likely replace 'so' with a because-clause explaining her motive, adding a layer of reasoning rather than just sequence. It's accurate but grammatically the simplest option available.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer softens its claim with 'I'd say' and pulls its points together at the end with the reflective phrase 'Either way, everyone seems to mention the same thing.'

   In Vietnam, I'd say the first reason is often trust. My aunt stopped buying morning glory from the market after a pesticide scare and now grows it herself in a plastic tub, because she wants to know exactly what's on it. Cost matters too, especially for families on tight budgets, and taste is a real factor, since a tomato picked that morning is honestly a different thing from one that's travelled three days. For older people, it's also continuity with a rural childhood, while for younger ones it's more of a hobby. Either way, everyone seems to mention the same thing: the satisfaction of eating something you grew yourself.

   Why this band

   • FC“Either way, everyone seems to mention the same thing” — This phrase synthesises the separate reasons into one observation rather than just listing them, showing a more reflective, considered way of concluding. A 6.5 answer would more likely just add one more item to the list with 'finally' or 'also'. It demonstrates the natural cohesive wrap-up typical of this band.
   • LR“continuity with a rural childhood” — This is a moderately elevated collocation, more precise than a plain phrase like 'reminds them of when they were young'. A 6.5 answer would likely use simpler wording to express the same idea. It isn't as vivid as a 7.5 phrase, but it shows clearly above-basic vocabulary control.
   • GRA“For older people, it's also continuity with a rural childhood, while for younger ones it's more of a hobby.” — The 'while' clause here creates a contrastive link between two groups within a single sentence, which is more complex than simply stating each group's reason separately. A 6.5 answer would likely split this into two short, separate sentences instead. This is a good example of the 'one moderately complex sentence' expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the vivid, idiomatic phrase 'a world apart from' and balances two groups in one semicolon-linked sentence for a more compact, sophisticated structure.

   In Vietnam the first reason is often trust. My aunt stopped buying morning glory from the market after a pesticide scare and now grows it in a plastic tub in her yard, simply because she wants to know exactly what's on it. Cost matters for families on tight budgets, and taste does too — a tomato picked that morning is a world apart from one that's travelled three days. For older people, it's continuity with a rural childhood; for younger ones, it's partly a hobby and partly a quiet protest against how far food has drifted from them. And then there's the satisfaction everyone mentions: eating something you grew is a pleasure wildly out of proportion to the size of the plant.

   Why this band

   • FC“And then there's the satisfaction everyone mentions:” — This phrase, followed by a colon, sets up the closing idea as a deliberate final flourish rather than just another item in a list. A 7.0 answer would likely use the flatter 'Either way, everyone seems to mention the same thing' without the colon's forward-pointing effect. It shows confident, flexible management of the closing move.
   • LR“a world apart from” — This idiomatic collocation is far more vivid and precise than a plain comparison like 'different from', painting a stronger image of the contrast in taste. A 7.0 answer would more likely use the safer, plainer 'a different thing from'. This kind of natural idiom is a clear marker of the top band.
   • GRA“For older people, it's continuity with a rural childhood; for younger ones, it's partly a hobby and partly a quiet protest against how far food has drifted from them.” — The semicolon here balances two parallel clauses about different groups within a single compact sentence, rather than splitting them with a plainer connector like 'while'. A 7.0 answer would likely use 'while' instead of this semicolon-based parallelism. This tighter, more flexible construction is characteristic of 7.5 grammar.

5. 5. Can everyone easily grow their own fruit and vegetables?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct 'No, I don't think so' followed by one plain personal example and simple supporting reasons joined with 'but' and 'also'.

   No, I don't think so. My own windowsill is proof — I've tried to grow basil three times, and it died three times. Growing food needs light, space, water, and time, but most city flats don't have enough of these things. People who work long hours also find it hard to keep a plant alive. Herbs in a small pot are possible for most people, but growing enough food to actually eat is much harder for people living in cities.

   Why this band

   • FC“No, I don't think so.” — This is a short, direct position statement with no hedging or softening. A 7.0 answer would more likely open with 'Honestly, no' to add a touch of natural spoken tone. It's clear and appropriate, but the simplest possible way to state disagreement.
   • LR“My own windowsill is proof” — The word 'proof' here is plain and functional, stating the point directly without any vivid imagery. A 7.5 answer would likely turn this into something more memorable, like calling failed basil attempts 'funerals'. The vocabulary is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“I've tried to grow basil three times, and it died three times.” — This sentence repeats the structure 'three times... three times' joined by a simple 'and', which is a plain, slightly repetitive way to make the point. A 7.5 answer would likely compress this into a punchier phrase like 'three attempts at basil, three funerals'. It's grammatically correct but structurally basic.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer hedges its final claim with 'I'd say' and 'at least not for the average city dweller', softening a flat conclusion into a more considered judgement.

   Honestly, no, and my own north-facing windowsill is the evidence — three attempts at basil, three funerals. Growing food needs light, space, water, and time, and city flats are usually short of all four, so people who work long hours or travel a lot simply can't keep a plant alive. Knowledge matters as well; my neighbour makes her balcony jungle look effortless because she grew up doing it, while beginners like me tend to kill things for years. I'd say herbs in a pot are within most people's reach, but growing a meaningful amount of food isn't, at least not for the average city dweller.

   Why this band

   • FC“I'd say herbs in a pot are within most people's reach” — The hedge 'I'd say' frames this as a considered personal judgement rather than a flat fact, which is a natural feature of reflective spoken English. A 6.5 answer would more likely just state 'Herbs in a small pot are possible for most people' without this softening. It's a clear marker of the mild reflection expected at 7.0.
   • LR“three attempts at basil, three funerals” — This mildly idiomatic, humorous metaphor, calling dead plants 'funerals', is more vivid than a plain statement like 'it died three times'. A 6.5 answer would likely stick to the literal, plainer wording. It shows a moderately elevated, natural turn of phrase typical of this band.
   • GRA“Knowledge matters as well; my neighbour makes her balcony jungle look effortless because she grew up doing it, while beginners like me tend to kill things for years.” — This sentence uses a semicolon followed by a 'while' clause to link two contrasting ideas about knowledge in one flowing unit. A 6.5 answer would more likely present these as two separate, plainer sentences. This is a good example of the moderately complex sentence structure expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer closes with a compact tricolon, 'easy for some, possible for many, and realistic as an actual food supply for very few', and uses inverted grammar with 'as is a bucket of chillies'.

   No, and my own north-facing windowsill is the evidence — three attempts at basil, three funerals. Growing food demands light, space, water, and time, and city flats are chronically short of all four. People who work long hours or travel simply can't keep a plant alive, let alone a vegetable patch. Knowledge counts for just as much; my neighbour makes her balcony jungle look effortless because she grew up doing it, while beginners kill things for years before they get the knack. Herbs in a pot are within most people's reach, as is a bucket of chillies, but a meaningful amount of food isn't, not for the majority of urban dwellers. It's easy for some, possible for many, and realistic as an actual food supply for very few.

   Why this band

   • FC“It's easy for some, possible for many, and realistic as an actual food supply for very few.” — This closing tricolon compresses the whole answer's argument into one balanced, rhythmic sentence rather than a plain restated conclusion. A 7.0 answer would more likely end with a flatter sentence like 'at least not for the average city dweller'. This kind of compact evaluative closing is a hallmark of the top band.
   • LR“city flats are chronically short of all four” — The collocation 'chronically short of' is a genuinely less-common, more precise way of saying flats permanently lack these resources, going beyond a plain phrase like 'don't have enough'. A 7.0 answer would more likely use the simpler 'usually short of'. This is a clear example of elevated lexical choice.
   • GRA“Herbs in a pot are within most people's reach, as is a bucket of chillies” — The inverted structure 'as is a bucket of chillies' uses subject-auxiliary inversion instead of a plainer 'and so is a bucket of chillies', giving the sentence a tighter, more literary rhythm. A 7.0 answer would be unlikely to attempt this inversion. This flexible, compressed grammar is characteristic of 7.5.

6. 6. Will people grow more of their own food in the future?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct opinion, 'I think a little more, but not a lot', supported by one plain example and simple reasons linked with 'and' and 'but'.

   I think a little more, but not a lot. In Da Nang, supermarkets now sell small grow-boxes for rooftops next to the vegetables, which shows people are interested. Worries about food safety and rising prices make people want to grow their own food, and new technology like automatic watering makes it easier. But cities are getting busier and more crowded, so most people won't have time or space. I think growing food will become a popular hobby, but most food will still come from farms.

   Why this band

   • FC“I think a little more, but not a lot.” — This is a short, direct opinion statement placed right at the start, using the plainest possible framing. A 7.0 answer would more likely soften this with 'A bit more, I'd guess', which sounds more like natural reflection. It's clear and appropriate but structurally very basic.
   • LR“which shows people are interested” — This is plain, general vocabulary that states the point without much precision. A 7.5 answer would likely replace it with something more specific, like 'which tells you there's a genuine appetite for the idea'. The word choice here is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“But cities are getting busier and more crowded, so most people won't have time or space.” — This sentence links two simple clauses with 'so', producing a plain cause-then-effect chain. A 7.0 answer would more likely combine several such factors into one sentence using 'while' or 'plus'. It's grammatically correct but structurally the simplest option.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer hedges with 'I'd guess' and pivots naturally with 'That said', a spoken connector that signals a balanced, considered view.

   A bit more, I'd guess, but probably not as a serious share of what people actually eat. Da Nang supermarkets now sell rooftop grow-boxes right next to the vegetables, which honestly tells you there's already a market for the idea. Concerns about food safety and rising prices, plus the general wish to do something with your hands, will push some people toward it, especially as technology like automatic watering makes it easier. That said, cities are getting denser and people busier, while industrial farming keeps getting cheaper. So my guess is that growing food becomes a popular hobby rather than a real source of calories.

   Why this band

   • FC“That said, cities are getting denser and people busier” — The connector 'That said' signals a natural pivot to a counter-argument, showing the speaker weighing both sides rather than just listing points. A 6.5 answer would more likely use the plainer 'But' in its place. This kind of natural spoken contrastive marker is typical of 7.0 fluency.
   • LR“a real source of calories” — Using 'calories' instead of the plain word 'food' shows a slightly more precise, considered word choice appropriate to a discussion of nutrition and supply. A 6.5 answer would more likely just repeat 'food' throughout. It's a modest but clear step up in lexical precision.
   • GRA“Concerns about food safety and rising prices, plus the general wish to do something with your hands, will push some people toward it, especially as technology like automatic watering makes it easier.” — This long sentence embeds a 'plus' phrase and an 'especially as' clause inside a single main clause, layering several ideas together rather than listing them as separate sentences. A 6.5 answer would more likely break this into two or three shorter sentences. It shows the moderately complex grammar expected at this band.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer opens its counter-argument with the fronted clause 'Working against that, though,' and uses the compressed, elliptical structure 'cities are getting denser, people busier'.

   A bit more, I suspect, but not as a serious share of what people eat. Da Nang supermarkets now sell rooftop grow-boxes right next to the vegetables, which tells you there's a genuine appetite for the idea. Concerns about food safety, rising prices, and the general urge to do something with your hands will nudge people toward it, and technology like automatic watering only smooths the way. Working against that, though, cities are getting denser, people busier, and industrial farming keeps undercutting the price of doing it yourself. My best guess is that growing food settles into a popular hobby and a source of herbs and pride, while the actual calories keep coming from farms — probably even more so than now.

   Why this band

   • FC“Working against that, though,” — This fronted clause pulls the counter-argument to the front of the sentence for emphasis, a more sophisticated cohesion device than a plain 'But' at the start of a sentence. A 7.0 answer would more likely use the flatter 'That said' in this position. It shows confident, flexible management of contrastive discourse.
   • LR“industrial farming keeps undercutting the price of doing it yourself” — The verb 'undercutting' is a genuinely less-common, business-flavoured collocation that precisely captures competitive pricing pressure. A 7.0 answer would more likely use the plainer 'keeps getting cheaper'. This is a clear example of elevated, natural lexical choice.
   • GRA“Working against that, though, cities are getting denser, people busier, and industrial farming keeps undercutting the price of doing it yourself.” — This sentence drops the repeated verb in 'people busier' (instead of 'people are getting busier'), creating a compressed, elegant parallel list rather than repeating the full structure each time. A 7.0 answer would be unlikely to omit the verb this way. This kind of ellipsis is characteristic of flexible top-band grammar.

7. 7. How realistic is it for countries to produce all of their own food?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer states its position directly, 'For most countries, I don't think it's realistic', then supports it with a basic conditional and one plain example.

   For most countries, I don't think it's realistic. Vietnam exports a lot of rice and coffee, but imports things like wheat, dairy, and beef, because our climate isn't good for growing everything. If a country tried to produce all its own food, it would be very expensive and some countries just couldn't do it, especially small ones. I think it's good to grow some basic food for safety, but trying to produce everything would make people poorer and hungrier.

   Why this band

   • FC“For most countries, I don't think it's realistic.” — This opening sentence states the position plainly and directly with no hedging or added nuance. A 7.5 answer would more likely use a compact elliptical version like 'not remotely realistic', which sounds more confident and less like a rehearsed template. It's clear and appropriate but the simplest possible opener.
   • LR“very expensive” — This is plain, common vocabulary that gets the idea across without any vivid detail. A 7.5 answer would likely replace it with something more idiomatic, like 'paying handsomely for the privilege'. The word choice here is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“If a country tried to produce all its own food, it would be very expensive and some countries just couldn't do it, especially small ones.” — This is a basic conditional structure ('If... it would...') joined to a second clause with 'and', which is correct but the simplest hypothetical form available. A 7.0 answer would likely extend this conditional with a relative clause for more nuance. It shows accurate but unambitious grammar.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer adds the reflective aside 'I'm not sure it's even desirable' and closes with the natural hedge 'to be fair', qualifying its own judgement.

   Honestly, for most countries it's not realistic, and I'm not sure it's even desirable. Vietnam exports rice and coffee by the shipload but imports things like wheat, dairy, and beef, because our climate suits some crops and not others. If a country tried to be fully self-sufficient, it would mean eating only what grows locally and paying a lot more for it, which small or dry countries simply couldn't manage. That said, having some self-reliance in basics makes sense as a kind of insurance — the pandemic showed what happens when supply chains break down. But total self-sufficiency, to be fair, is more of a fantasy than a plan.

   Why this band

   • FC“But total self-sufficiency, to be fair, is more of a fantasy than a plan.” — The inserted hedge 'to be fair' shows the speaker qualifying a strong claim rather than just stating it outright, which is a natural feature of reflective spoken English. A 6.5 answer would more likely state this flatly as 'trying to produce everything would make people poorer'. It's a clear example of the mild qualifying remark expected at 7.0.
   • LR“exports rice and coffee by the shipload” — The phrase 'by the shipload' is a vivid, moderately elevated collocation that paints a stronger picture than a plain phrase like 'exports a lot of'. A 6.5 answer would more likely use the flatter wording. It shows natural, slightly idiomatic control of vocabulary typical of this band.
   • GRA“If a country tried to be fully self-sufficient, it would mean eating only what grows locally and paying a lot more for it, which small or dry countries simply couldn't manage.” — This extends a basic conditional with an added relative clause, 'which small or dry countries simply couldn't manage', layering extra detail into a single sentence rather than starting a new one. A 6.5 answer would more likely stop at the plain conditional and add the extra detail as a separate sentence. This shows the moderately complex grammar expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer opens with a compact, elliptical fragment, 'For most countries, not remotely realistic', dropping the subject and verb for a punchier, more confident start.

   For most countries, not remotely realistic, and not necessarily desirable either. Vietnam exports rice and coffee by the shipload and imports wheat, dairy, and beef, simply because our climate favours some crops and is hopeless for others — true self-sufficiency would mean eating only what grows here and paying handsomely for the privilege. Small or arid countries couldn't feed themselves at any price. Some self-reliance in staples makes sense as a form of insurance; the pandemic laid bare what happens when supply chains snap. But chasing total self-sufficiency is a fantasy that would leave everyone poorer and hungrier. A country should be able to weather a shock, not pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.

   Why this band

   • FC“For most countries, not remotely realistic, and not necessarily desirable either.” — This opening drops the subject and verb ('it is') entirely, producing a compact fragment that sounds more confident and considered than a full plain sentence. A 6.5 answer would more likely write the full 'I don't think it's realistic'. This kind of elliptical opener is a hallmark of top-band fluency.
   • LR“paying handsomely for the privilege” — The idiomatic collocation 'paying handsomely for the privilege' is a genuinely less-common, slightly ironic way of describing high cost, far more vivid than a plain phrase like 'paying a lot more'. A 7.0 answer would more likely use that simpler wording instead. This is a clear marker of top-band lexical control.
   • GRA“Some self-reliance in staples makes sense as a form of insurance; the pandemic laid bare what happens when supply chains snap.” — The semicolon here joins two independent clauses into one tightly linked unit without a connecting word, a more compact and literary structure than using 'because' or starting a new sentence. A 7.0 answer would more likely use the plainer 'the pandemic showed what happens...' as a separate sentence. This flexible, compressed grammar is characteristic of 7.5.

8. 8. Does science and technology always have positive effects on the food that is produced on farms?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer opens with the short, direct 'No, not always', then supports it with one plain example and simple listed effects.

   No, not always. My uncle's farm shows both the good and bad sides. New seeds and fertilisers doubled his rice yields over twenty years, which meant his children could go to university. But at the same time, the fish that used to live in the field channels disappeared because of the chemicals. So technology has helped reduce hunger, but it has also caused problems like less tasty food and damaged soil. It really depends on how the technology is used.

   Why this band

   • FC“No, not always.” — This is a short, direct position statement with no additional framing or reflection. A 7.0 answer would more likely open with 'Not always, and honestly my uncle's farm shows both sides of it', adding a personal reflective touch. It's clear and appropriate but the plainest possible opener.
   • LR“less tasty food” — This is plain, everyday vocabulary that states the idea simply. A 7.0 or 7.5 answer would more likely use a more precise word like 'flavour' instead of 'tasty'. The word choice here is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“New seeds and fertilisers doubled his rice yields over twenty years, which meant his children could go to university.” — This sentence uses a simple relative clause with 'which' to add a consequence, a straightforward and correct but unambitious structure. A 7.5 answer would likely tighten this with 'which is precisely why', adding more emphasis and flow. It shows accurate but basic grammar.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer inserts the natural parenthetical hedge 'that's not really in doubt' mid-sentence, showing the speaker weighing certainty against nuance in real time.

   Not always, and honestly my uncle's farm shows both sides of it in one place. New seed varieties and fertilisers roughly doubled his rice yields over twenty years, which is actually why his children went to university. Over those same years, though, the fish he used to catch in the field channels disappeared, because of the chemicals that produced those higher yields. I'd say technology has clearly fed a growing population and reduced hunger — that's not really in doubt — but it's also produced food with less flavour and soil that now depends on constant inputs. To be fair, a lot of today's technology is really just trying to fix problems the earlier technology created.

   Why this band

   • FC“that's not really in doubt” — This parenthetical aside, dropped into the middle of a longer sentence, shows the speaker qualifying their own claim in real time rather than just stating it. A 6.5 answer would more likely leave this idea out or state it as a separate, plainer sentence. It's a clear marker of the natural spoken reflection expected at 7.0.
   • LR“soil that now depends on constant inputs” — The collocation 'constant inputs' is a moderately elevated, more technical way of describing ongoing dependence on fertiliser, going beyond a plain phrase like 'soil that needs more chemicals'. A 6.5 answer would more likely use that simpler wording. It shows a clear step up in lexical precision.
   • GRA“Over those same years, though, the fish he used to catch in the field channels disappeared, because of the chemicals that produced those higher yields.” — This sentence fronts the adverbial 'Over those same years, though' and embeds a relative clause at the end, layering two structural devices into one sentence. A 6.5 answer would more likely present the time reference and the cause as two separate, plainer sentences. This shows the moderately complex grammar expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer opens its closing thought with the sophisticated connector 'If anything' and uses a triple compressed verb structure, 'churned out... left... racked up', instead of three separate sentences.

   Not always, and my uncle's farm lays bare both sides of it in one place. New seed varieties and fertilisers roughly doubled his rice yields over twenty years, which is precisely why his children made it to university. Over those same years, though, the fish he grew up catching in the field channels vanished, a casualty of the very chemicals that produced those yields. Technology has undeniably fed a growing population and slashed hunger — that much isn't in doubt. But it has also churned out food with less flavour, left soil dependent on constant inputs, and racked up long-term costs nobody priced in at the time. If anything, today's best technology is mostly busy fixing problems the earlier technology created, which counts as progress of a sort.

   Why this band

   • FC“If anything, today's best technology is mostly busy fixing problems the earlier technology created” — The connector 'If anything' introduces a refined, slightly counterintuitive closing observation rather than a plain restatement. A 7.0 answer would more likely close with the flatter 'To be fair, a lot of today's technology is really just trying to fix problems'. This kind of sophisticated connector is a hallmark of top-band coherence.
   • LR“a casualty of the very chemicals that produced those yields” — Using 'casualty' metaphorically to describe the vanished fish is a genuinely less-common, vivid word choice that goes well beyond a plain phrase like 'disappeared because of the chemicals'. A 7.0 answer would more likely stick to that literal wording. This is a clear example of idiomatic, top-band vocabulary.
   • GRA“But it has also churned out food with less flavour, left soil dependent on constant inputs, and racked up long-term costs nobody priced in at the time.” — This sentence lists three distinct effects using three different verbs, 'churned out', 'left', and 'racked up', in a single parallel structure without repeating the subject each time. A 7.0 answer would more likely split these across two separate sentences. This compact, flexible parallelism is characteristic of 7.5 grammar.

9. 9. Will population growth be the most significant challenge for the farming industry in the future?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct opinion, 'I don't think so, at least not in my country', supported by plain listed reasons joined with 'but', 'because', and 'and'.

   I don't think so, at least not in my country. Vietnam's population isn't growing much now, but farms are still under pressure because salt water is moving into the rice fields as the sea rises, and young people are leaving farming. I think bigger problems are climate change, water shortages, and the fact that fewer young people want to be farmers — my uncle's neighbours are all older farmers. So feeding more people isn't really the hardest problem; feeding people while the planet changes is.

   Why this band

   • FC“I don't think so, at least not in my country.” — This is a direct, plain position statement placed right at the start with minimal framing. A 7.0 answer would more likely open with 'Honestly, I don't think so', adding a natural spoken filler. It's clear and appropriate but structurally the simplest possible opener.
   • LR“water shortages” — This is plain, everyday vocabulary that names the problem directly without any added precision. A 7.0 answer would likely fold this into a longer list phrase like 'the sharper challenges are climate, water, and degraded soil'. The word choice here is accurate but entirely ordinary.
   • GRA“Vietnam's population isn't growing much now, but farms are still under pressure because salt water is moving into the rice fields as the sea rises, and young people are leaving farming.” — This long sentence strings together clauses with 'but', 'because', and 'and', producing an additive but somewhat loosely coordinated structure. A 7.5 answer would more likely tighten this using a participial phrase like 'coupled with young people abandoning the land'. It's grammatically correct but structurally plain.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer adds the reflective aside 'There's also the question of what people eat' before introducing a further point, showing genuine mid-answer consideration.

   Honestly, I don't think so, at least not where I live. Vietnam's population is barely growing now, and the real pressure on farms in the centre of the country comes from salt water creeping into the rice fields as the sea rises, plus young people leaving the land altogether. Globally, population probably matters in some regions, but I'd say the sharper challenges are climate, water, and degraded soil, along with the loss of farmers themselves — my uncle's neighbours, for instance, are all over sixty. There's also the question of what people eat, since a shift toward more meat strains farming far more than extra mouths do. Feeding more people is a solvable problem; feeding them with nobody left to farm is the harder one.

   Why this band

   • FC“There's also the question of what people eat” — This phrase introduces an additional reflective point as though the speaker is genuinely thinking it through in the moment, rather than just adding another item to a rehearsed list. A 6.5 answer would more likely just add 'Also, people are eating more meat now' without this framing. It's a clear marker of the natural reflection expected at 7.0.
   • LR“a shift toward more meat strains farming” — The verb 'strains' is a moderately elevated collocation, more precise than a plain phrase like 'is bad for farming' or 'causes problems for farming'. A 6.5 answer would more likely use that simpler wording. It shows a clear step up in lexical precision typical of this band.
   • GRA“Feeding more people is a solvable problem; feeding them with nobody left to farm is the harder one.” — This closing sentence uses a semicolon to balance two parallel clauses directly against each other, rather than joining them with a plainer word like 'but'. A 6.5 answer would more likely write this as two separate, plainer sentences. It shows the moderately complex, balanced grammar expected at 7.0.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer inserts the parenthetical 'to my mind' mid-sentence and uses the compact participial phrase 'coupled with young people abandoning the land altogether' instead of a full extra clause.

   I don't think so, at least not where I live. Vietnam's population is barely growing now, and the real pressure on farms in the centre of the country comes from salt water creeping into the rice fields as the sea rises, coupled with young people abandoning the land altogether. Globally, population will matter in certain regions, but the sharper challenges, to my mind, are climate, water, degraded soil, and the loss of farmers themselves — my uncle's neighbours, notably, are all over sixty. There's also the question of what people eat; a shift toward more meat strains farming far more than extra mouths ever could. Feeding more people is, in the end, a solvable problem. Feeding them on a changing planet with nobody left to farm it is the hard one.

   Why this band

   • FC“Feeding more people is, in the end, a solvable problem.” — The parenthetical insertion 'in the end' breaks up the main clause to add a considered, evaluative tone, functioning as a compact closing judgement rather than a plain statement. A 7.0 answer would more likely write this without the interruption, as a flatter sentence. This kind of flexible insertion is a hallmark of top-band coherence.
   • LR“coupled with young people abandoning the land altogether” — The collocation 'coupled with' is a genuinely less-common, more formal way of linking two contributing factors than a plain 'and', giving the sentence a more polished, precise feel. A 7.0 answer would more likely just use 'plus young people leaving the land'. This is a clear example of elevated lexical choice.
   • GRA“the sharper challenges, to my mind, are climate, water, degraded soil, and the loss of farmers themselves” — The parenthetical 'to my mind' is inserted directly into the middle of the main clause rather than placed at the start or end, which is a more flexible and natural way of marking opinion. A 7.0 answer would more likely place a similar hedge, like 'I'd say', at the front of the sentence instead. This mid-clause insertion is characteristic of the compact, flexible grammar expected at 7.5.