Think about these questions, or answer them aloud.
In Abstract discussion you learned to weigh up both sides of a Part 3 question (On the plus side… The downside is…). At C1, evaluating means more than that: it means making a judgement and showing the grounds for it. Two candidates can list exactly the same advantages and disadvantages; the stronger one says which of them matters more, and why.
Evaluative questions often look like this: Is it fair that…? Is it right for…? How far do you agree…? Is… a good use of public money? Do the benefits outweigh the drawbacks?
Three moves make an evaluation convincing:
Balanced does not mean undecided. “There are good points on both sides, so it's hard to say” sits on the fence and gives the examiner very little to assess. A balanced answer still arrives somewhere.
| Move | Useful language | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Calibrated agreement | I agree up to a point / I'd go along with that to some extent / I wouldn't go as far as saying… / I'd draw the line at… / I couldn't agree more | I'd go along with that up to a point, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it should be compulsory. |
| Naming the criterion | If we judge it by… / In terms of… / From the point of view of… / What really matters here is… | If we judge it by results rather than intentions, the scheme hasn't worked. |
| Conceding | Admittedly, … / Granted, … / It's true that… / I take the point that… / There's something to be said for… | Granted, free entry costs the taxpayer money. |
| Countering | Even so, … / That doesn't necessarily mean… / The trouble with that argument is… / But that's outweighed by… | Even so, the long-term benefits are far greater. |
| Justifying | on the grounds that… / given that… / which is why… / The reason I say that is… | I'd keep it, given that it's the only free space for teenagers in the area. |
| Verdict | On the whole… / All things considered… / Ultimately, it comes down to… / For me, the deciding factor is… | All things considered, it's a price worth paying. |
Match each phrase to its job in an evaluation. There is one extra job.
Answer 1 (How far do you agree?)
Answer 2 (Is it fair?)
Notice what is missing: no “there are advantages and disadvantages”, no personal story and no fence-sitting. Both answers are balanced, and both reach a verdict.
Complete the Part 3 answer with words from the box. Each word is used once.
No preparation, as in Part 3. Give a clear (possibly qualified) position, name a criterion, concede one point and counter it, then give a verdict with grounds or a condition. Aim for 45–60 seconds.
Topic: Tourism. Some popular cities now limit the number of tourists who can visit each day. Is this a fair policy?
No preparation time · 1:00 speaking
No preparation, as in the TOEFL interview. In 45 seconds, use a compact version: position, one concession, a counter and a verdict. Stop at 45 seconds.
Interviewer: Some universities now require every student to do volunteer work in the local community before they graduate. Do you think this is a good requirement? Why or why not?
No preparation time · 0:45 speaking
Save words to review them later with flashcards.
“The plan was rejected on the grounds that it was too expensive.”
“Admittedly, the course is expensive, but it's worth every penny.”
“Granted, the new road will save time. Even so, it will destroy the woods.”
“I agree with you up to a point.”
“I don't mind working late, but I draw the line at weekends.”
“Price was the deciding factor in choosing the flat.”
“A longer commute is a price worth paying for a bigger garden.”
“You can't sit on the fence forever; you'll have to decide.”
“Young families are being priced out of the city centre.”
“In August, the old town is overrun with visitors.”
“The company is phasing out plastic packaging.”
