IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời "Describe A Person Who Is An Expert In A Particular Field" - Bài Mẫu Band 6-9 » IELTS.NET

Chủ đề mô tả một chuyên gia trong lĩnh vực cụ thể là một trong những dạng câu hỏi thường xuyên xuất hiện trong IELTS Speaking Part 2. Theo thống kê từ các kỳ thi thực tế, chủ đề này có tần suất xuất hiện khá cao từ năm 2020 đến nay, đặc biệt phổ biến trong các quý 1 và quý 3 hàng năm. Khả năng xuất hiện trong tương lai được đánh giá ở mức cao do tính ứng dụng rộng rãi và khả năng khai thác nhiều góc độ khác nhau.

Mục lục nội dung

Chủ đề này đòi hỏi bạn phải thể hiện khả năng miêu tả con người, giải thích lý do tại sao họ là chuyên gia, và phân tích ảnh hưởng của họ. Đây là cơ hội tuyệt vời để bạn sử dụng từ vựng chuyên ngành, cấu trúc ngữ pháp phức tạp và thể hiện khả năng tư duy phản biện.

Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ học được:

Các câu hỏi thường gặp trong cả 3 Part liên quan đến chủ đề chuyên gia và chuyên môn
Bài mẫu chi tiết theo ba mức band điểm (6-7, 7.5-8, 8.5-9) với phân tích chuyên sâu
Hơn 50 từ vựng và cụm từ ăn điểm, bao gồm collocations và idioms
Chiến lược trả lời hiệu quả từ góc nhìn của một Examiner chính thức
Những lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam và cách khắc phục
Kỹ thuật mở rộng câu trả lời một cách tự nhiên và mạch lạc

IELTS Speaking Part 1: Introduction and Interview

Tổng Quan Về Part 1

Part 1 của IELTS Speaking kéo dài 4-5 phút với các câu hỏi ngắn về cuộc sống hàng ngày, sở thích cá nhân và những chủ đề quen thuộc. Đây là phần “khởi động” để bạn làm quen với giám khảo và môi trường thi.

Đặc điểm chính:

Câu hỏi trực tiếp, dễ hiểu về bản thân và cuộc sống
Thời gian trả lời lý tưởng: 2-3 câu (khoảng 10-15 giây mỗi câu)
Không cần trả lời quá chi tiết hoặc phức tạp

Chiến lược hiệu quả:

Trả lời trực tiếp câu hỏi ngay từ câu đầu tiên
Mở rộng với lý do hoặc ví dụ cụ thể
Sử dụng từ vựng đa dạng nhưng tự nhiên
Giữ giọng nói tự tin và thân thiện

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

Trả lời quá ngắn gọn chỉ với “Yes” hoặc “No”
Sử dụng từ vựng đơn giản, lặp đi lặp lại (good, bad, like, don’t like)
Thiếu ví dụ cụ thể từ kinh nghiệm cá nhân
Không duy trì eye contact và nói quá nhanh do lo lắng
Sử dụng cấu trúc câu đơn giản, thiếu đa dạng về ngữ pháp

Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp

Question 1: Do you know any experts in a particular field?

Question 2: What makes someone an expert in their field?

Question 3: Have you ever wanted to become an expert at something?

Question 4: Do you think it’s important to have expertise in your job?

Question 5: How do people usually become experts?

Question 6: Do you prefer to learn from experts or teach yourself?

Question 7: What field would you like to be an expert in?

Question 8: Do you think experts should share their knowledge?

Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết

Question: Do you know any experts in a particular field?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

Trả lời trực tiếp Yes/No
Nêu tên người hoặc lĩnh vực cụ thể
Giải thích ngắn gọn tại sao họ là chuyên gia
Thêm một chi tiết cá nhân về mối quan hệ hoặc ấn tượng

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I know a few experts. My uncle is a good doctor who has worked for 20 years. He knows a lot about heart diseases. Many people come to see him because he is very experienced and helpful.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh: Trả lời rõ ràng, có ví dụ cụ thể (uncle, doctor, 20 years), đủ độ dài
Hạn chế: Từ vựng còn đơn giản (good, a lot, very), cấu trúc câu cơ bản, thiếu collocations
Tại sao Band 6-7: Nội dung đầy đủ và dễ hiểu nhưng chưa thể hiện được vocabulary range và grammatical complexity cao

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Yes, absolutely. I’m quite fortunate to know my uncle, who’s a highly regarded cardiologist with over two decades of experience. He’s particularly renowned for his expertise in treating complex heart conditions, and what really sets him apart is his ability to explain intricate medical concepts in a way that patients can easily understand. I’ve always been impressed by his depth of knowledge and his dedication to staying at the forefront of medical advances.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh:
- Từ vựng chuyên ngành và academic: highly regarded, cardiologist, renowned for, intricate, depth of knowledge, at the forefront
- Cụm từ tự nhiên: quite fortunate, what really sets him apart, I’ve always been impressed
- Cấu trúc phức tạp: relative clause (who’s a…), present perfect (I’ve always been impressed)
- Chi tiết cụ thể và đa chiều (không chỉ kiến thức mà còn kỹ năng giao tiếp)
Tại sao Band 8-9:
- Fluency: Câu trả lời trôi chảy, liên kết tự nhiên
- Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (cardiologist thay vì doctor, intricate thay vì difficult)
- Grammar: Đa dạng và chính xác (compound-complex sentences, perfect tenses)
- Content: Sâu sắc, nhiều lớp ý nghĩa (expertise + teaching ability + continuous learning)

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

highly regarded: được đánh giá cao, có uy tín
renowned for: nổi tiếng về
intricate medical concepts: các khái niệm y khoa phức tạp
depth of knowledge: chiều sâu kiến thức
at the forefront: đi đầu, tiên phong

Question: What makes someone an expert in their field?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

Liệt kê 2-3 yếu tố quan trọng
Giải thích ngắn gọn từng yếu tố
Có thể thêm ví dụ minh họa
Kết thúc bằng một nhận định tổng quát

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think experience is the most important thing. People need to work in their field for a long time to become experts. Also, they should keep learning new things and practice a lot. Education is important too, like getting a degree or certificate.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh: Có cấu trúc rõ ràng (experience, learning, education), logic dễ theo dõi
Hạn chế: Từ vựng lặp lại (important × 2), thiếu từ nối sophisticated, ý tưởng còn bề mặt
Tại sao Band 6-7: Đủ nội dung nhưng thiếu chiều sâu phân tích và precision trong vocabulary

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Well, I’d say expertise stems from a combination of several factors. First and foremost, extensive hands-on experience is crucial – you simply can’t become a master without putting in the hours and learning from real-world challenges. Beyond that, continuous professional development is essential, as experts need to stay abreast of the latest developments in their field. I’d also emphasize the importance of critical thinking and problem-solving abilities – true experts don’t just follow established procedures, they can think outside the box and develop innovative solutions. Finally, I believe passion and dedication play a huge role, because genuine enthusiasm often drives people to push beyond ordinary competence into true mastery.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh:
- Structure hoàn hảo: First and foremost → Beyond that → I’d also emphasize → Finally
- Vocabulary tinh vi: stems from, extensive hands-on experience, stay abreast of, genuine enthusiasm, true mastery
- Grammar phức tạp: negative inversion (you simply can’t), modal verbs (need to, can), relative clause
- Critical thinking: Không chỉ liệt kê mà còn giải thích sâu (can’t become a master without…, don’t just follow…)
Tại sao Band 8-9:
- Fluency: Sử dụng discourse markers tự nhiên (Well, First and foremost, Beyond that)
- Vocabulary: Precise và less common (stems from, abreast of, genuine enthusiasm)
- Grammar: Wide range (conditionals, complex sentences)
- Ideas: Sophisticated và well-developed với nhiều layers

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

stems from: xuất phát từ, bắt nguồn từ
extensive hands-on experience: kinh nghiệm thực tế sâu rộng
stay abreast of: cập nhật, theo kịp
critical thinking: tư duy phản biện
think outside the box: suy nghĩ sáng tạo, không theo khuôn mẫu
true mastery: sự thành thạo thực sự

Question: Have you ever wanted to become an expert at something?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

Trả lời Yes/No một cách tự nhiên
Nêu lĩnh vực cụ thể
Giải thích lý do tại sao muốn/không muốn
Thêm thông tin về tiến trình hiện tại (nếu có)

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I want to become an expert in English teaching. I really like teaching and I think it’s a useful skill. I’m studying hard now and trying to learn more teaching methods. I hope in the future I can teach English very well and help many students.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh: Trả lời đầy đủ câu hỏi, có mục tiêu cụ thể, có đề cập đến nỗ lực hiện tại
Hạn chế: Từ vựng generic (really like, useful, very well), thiếu details về cách thức, động lực chưa rõ
Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate nhưng lacks sophistication và depth

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Absolutely! I’ve always been deeply fascinated by digital marketing, and I’m actually on a journey to build expertise in this field. What draws me to this area is the dynamic nature of the industry – it’s constantly evolving with new platforms and strategies emerging all the time. I’m currently immersing myself in online courses, staying current with industry trends through podcasts and blogs, and most importantly, applying what I learn to real projects. While I wouldn’t call myself an expert yet, I’m committed to reaching that level of proficiency within the next few years. The prospect of being able to craft compelling campaigns and drive measurable results for businesses really motivates me.

Phân tích:

Điểm mạnh:
- Personal engagement: Absolutely, I’ve always been, what draws me to
- Specific details: digital marketing, online courses, podcasts, real projects
- Sophisticated vocabulary: deeply fascinated by, dynamic nature, immersing myself in, craft compelling campaigns
- Time reference: currently, yet, within the next few years
- Honest assessment: wouldn’t call myself an expert yet (realistic và natural)
Tại sao Band 8-9:
- Fluency: Natural flow với appropriate pausing and phrasing
- Vocabulary: Less common và precise (immersing, proficiency, compelling campaigns)
- Grammar: Complex structures (relative clauses, gerunds, present perfect continuous concepts)
- Coherence: Well-organized từ desire → reasons → current actions → future goals

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

deeply fascinated by: bị cuốn hút mạnh mẽ bởi
build expertise: xây dựng chuyên môn
draws me to: thu hút tôi đến
dynamic nature: tính chất năng động
immersing myself in: đắm mình vào
staying current with: cập nhật liên tục
craft compelling campaigns: tạo ra các chiến dịch hấp dẫn
drive measurable results: mang lại kết quả đo lường được

Giáo viên chấm thi IELTS Speaking đang đánh giá thí sinh theo tiêu chí chấm điểm chính thức

Tương tự như describe a situation when you had to think critically, việc mô tả một chuyên gia cũng đòi hỏi bạn phải thể hiện khả năng phân tích và đánh giá một cách có hệ thống. Kỹ năng tư duy phản biện sẽ giúp bạn lựa chọn chi tiết phù hợp và trình bày một cách logic.

IELTS Speaking Part 2: Long Turn (Cue Card)

Tổng Quan Về Part 2

Part 2 là phần độc thoại kéo dài 3-4 phút, bao gồm 1 phút chuẩn bị và 2 phút nói liên tục. Đây là phần quan trọng nhất để thể hiện khả năng ngôn ngữ của bạn.

Thời gian phân bổ:

1 phút chuẩn bị và ghi chú
2 phút nói (tối thiểu 1.5 phút, tối đa 2.5 phút)
30 giây – 1 phút cho follow-up questions

Đặc điểm và yêu cầu:

Độc thoại không bị ngắt quãng (examiner chỉ lắng nghe)
Phải trả lời đầy đủ tất cả các bullet points
Cần có cấu trúc rõ ràng: mở đầu – thân bài – kết luận
Sử dụng đa dạng thì động từ (thường là quá khứ cho người đã gặp, hiện tại cho người vẫn giao lưu)

Chiến lược hiệu quả:

Trong 1 phút chuẩn bị:

Đọc kỹ đề và gạch chân keywords
Ghi chú ngắn gọn cho mỗi bullet point (3-5 từ khóa mỗi ý)
Không viết câu hoàn chỉnh
Nghĩ đến 2-3 từ vựng nâng cao có thể sử dụng
Lên outline cấu trúc: Introduction → Body (theo bullet points) → Conclusion

Trong 2 phút nói:

Bắt đầu bằng 1-2 câu giới thiệu tổng quan
Dành 20-30 giây cho mỗi bullet point
Dành 30-40 giây cho phần “explain” (đây là phần quan trọng nhất)
Kết thúc bằng 1-2 câu tổng kết tự nhiên
Nói với tốc độ vừa phải (120-150 từ/phút)
Tự tin duy trì eye contact định kỳ

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

Không sử dụng hết 1 phút chuẩn bị hoặc viết quá nhiều
Nói dưới 1.5 phút (mất điểm Fluency)
Bỏ sót hoặc trả lời không đủ một bullet point nào đó
Tập trung quá nhiều vào các bullet đầu, phần “explain” quá ngắn
Sử dụng template cứng nhắc, không tự nhiên
Lặp lại từ vựng trong đề bài thay vì paraphrase
Thiếu ví dụ cụ thể và chi tiết sống động

Cue Card

Describe A Person Who Is An Expert In A Particular Field

You should say:

Who this person is

What field they are expert in

How you know this person
And explain why you think this person is an expert

Phân Tích Đề Bài

Dạng câu hỏi: Describe a person – Mô tả con người

Thì động từ: Chủ yếu là hiện tại đơn (nếu người đó vẫn còn hoạt động) hoặc kết hợp quá khứ (nếu kể về quá trình trở thành chuyên gia)

Bullet points phải cover:

Who this person is: Giới thiệu danh tính, mối quan hệ với bạn, có thể thêm tuổi tác/background
What field they are expert in: Lĩnh vực chuyên môn cụ thể, không nên quá chung chung
How you know this person: Bối cảnh làm quen, tần suất gặp gỡ/tương tác
Explain why you think this person is an expert: Đây là phần QUAN TRỌNG NHẤT (30-40% thời gian) – cần có evidence, examples, achievements, qualities

Câu “explain” quan trọng:
Phần explain là nơi bạn thể hiện critical thinking và sophisticated vocabulary. Đừng chỉ nói “because they are good” mà cần:

Đưa ra evidence cụ thể (achievements, qualifications, experience)
So sánh với người khác trong cùng lĩnh vực
Phân tích qualities đặc biệt (knowledge, skills, attitude)
Đề cập đến recognition từ cộng đồng/ngành
Nêu impact của họ đối với field hoặc people

Lựa chọn đối tượng:

Nên chọn người bạn thực sự biết hoặc admire (sẽ nói tự nhiên hơn)
Tránh chọn celebrities quá nổi tiếng mà bạn không có gì độc đáo để nói
Có thể chọn: giáo viên, người thân, colleague, mentor, local expert, online educator

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7

Thời lượng: Khoảng 1.5-2 phút

I’d like to talk about my former English teacher, Ms. Lan, who is an expert in English teaching. She is around 35 years old and has been teaching English for more than 10 years.

Ms. Lan is expert in teaching English, especially for students preparing for IELTS exams. She knows a lot about the test format and has helped many students get high scores. She teaches at a language center in my city and is very popular there.

I first met Ms. Lan three years ago when I joined her IELTS class. She was my teacher for six months, and during that time, I learned a lot from her. Even after the course ended, I sometimes contact her for advice about English learning.

I think Ms. Lan is a real expert because she has deep knowledge about English teaching methods. She always explains difficult grammar points in simple ways that students can understand easily. She also uses many interesting activities in class to help students practice speaking and writing. Many of her students have passed IELTS with band 7 or higher, which shows she is very good at what she does. She is also very patient and dedicated to her job. She often spends extra time helping students who have problems with English. I really respect her and think she is an excellent teacher and expert in her field.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	6-7	Trả lời đầy đủ các bullet points, có cấu trúc rõ ràng nhưng còn mechanical. Sử dụng một số linking words cơ bản (especially, also, even after). Có pausing đôi chỗ khi tìm từ.
Lexical Resource	6-7	Từ vựng đủ dùng nhưng còn basic: “a lot”, “very popular”, “very good”. Có một số collocations tốt: “deep knowledge”, “dedicated to”. Paraphrase còn hạn chế.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	6-7	Sử dụng mix of simple và complex sentences. Có present perfect (has been teaching), relative clauses (which shows). Vẫn còn một số cấu trúc lặp lại (She is very…).
Pronunciation	6-7	Rõ ràng và dễ hiểu. Có word stress và sentence stress cơ bản. Intonation còn flat ở một số chỗ.

Điểm mạnh:

✅ Trả lời đủ tất cả bullet points theo đúng thứ tự
✅ Có examples cụ thể (IELTS class, 6 months, band 7 or higher)
✅ Thời lượng đủ 1.5-2 phút
✅ Cấu trúc rõ ràng, dễ theo dõi

Hạn chế:

⚠️ Từ vựng còn repetitive (very × 4, good, a lot)
⚠️ Thiếu sophisticated expressions và idioms
⚠️ Phần explain chưa đủ sâu, chưa có comparison hoặc specific achievements
⚠️ Grammar structures chưa đủ varied

📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8

Thời lượng: Khoảng 2-2.5 phút

I’d like to tell you about Dr. Minh, who is widely regarded as one of the leading authorities in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning in Vietnam. He’s in his early forties and has been working in this field for nearly two decades.

Dr. Minh specializes in developing AI solutions for healthcare applications, particularly in medical image analysis and disease prediction systems. His work focuses on creating algorithms that can help doctors detect abnormalities in medical scans more accurately and efficiently than traditional methods. He currently works as a research director at a major tech company and also holds a position as an adjunct professor at the National University.

I actually got to know Dr. Minh through a quite fortunate circumstance. About two years ago, he gave a guest lecture at my university about the applications of AI in modern medicine. I was absolutely fascinated by his presentation and approached him afterwards with some questions. He was incredibly approachable and even offered to mentor me on a small research project. Since then, we’ve maintained regular contact, and I’ve learned tremendously from his guidance.

What makes Dr. Minh a true expert in my eyes is not just his impressive credentials – though he does hold a PhD from MIT and has published over 50 papers in peer-reviewed journals. It’s his profound understanding of both the technical aspects and the practical applications of AI. He has this remarkable ability to bridge the gap between complex technical concepts and real-world problems. Moreover, his systems are already being used in several major hospitals across Vietnam, which demonstrates the tangible impact of his work. He’s also received numerous awards, including the National Prize for Young Scientists. But beyond all these achievements, what really sets him apart is his passion for sharing knowledge and nurturing the next generation of AI researchers. He regularly conducts free workshops and mentoring sessions, which I think shows his dedication to advancing the entire field, not just his own career.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	7.5-8	Speaks fluently với minimal hesitation. Sử dụng sophisticated discourse markers (actually, moreover, but beyond all these). Ý tưởng được develop logically và coherently.
Lexical Resource	7.5-8	Wide range of vocabulary: leading authorities, specializes in, detect abnormalities, impressive credentials, peer-reviewed journals, tangible impact, sets him apart. Sử dụng less common words một cách natural và precise.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7.5-8	Wide range of structures: relative clauses, present perfect, passive voice, gerunds. Câu phức hợp nhiều layers (What makes Dr. Minh a true expert…is not just…It’s his…). Ít lỗi và không ảnh hưởng communication.
Pronunciation	7.5-8	Clear và natural pronunciation. Sử dụng intonation và stress hiệu quả. Features của connected speech xuất hiện tự nhiên.

So Sánh Với Band 6-7

Khía cạnh	Band 6-7	Band 7.5-8
Vocabulary	“she knows a lot”, “very popular”, “very good”	“widely regarded as”, “leading authorities”, “profound understanding”, “sets him apart”
Grammar	“She has been teaching for 10 years” (simple present perfect)	“What makes Dr. Minh a true expert is not just his credentials – though he does hold…” (cleft sentence + concessive clause)
Ideas	“Many students passed with band 7” (basic evidence)	“PhD from MIT, 50+ papers, National Prize, systems used in hospitals” (multiple specific evidences with hierarchy)
Development	Listed qualities một cách simple	Analyzed qualities với examples và explained impact, showed depth

Điểm nổi bật:

✅ Vocabulary range impressive: leading authorities, adjunct professor, peer-reviewed journals, tangible impact
✅ Complex grammar: cleft sentences (What makes…is), relative clauses, passive structures
✅ Specific details: MIT, 50 papers, National Prize
✅ Critical analysis: không chỉ credentials mà còn ability và impact

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9

Thời lượng: 2.5-3 phút đầy đủ

I’d like to talk about Professor Sarah Chen, who I consider to be a luminary in the field of sustainable architecture and eco-friendly urban design. She’s in her mid-fifties and has been pushing the boundaries of green building practices for the better part of three decades.

Professor Chen’s expertise lies in designing buildings that are not only environmentally sustainable but also aesthetically striking and functionally superior. She pioneered the concept of “biomimetic architecture” in Southeast Asia – essentially creating structures that emulate natural systems to achieve maximum energy efficiency and minimal environmental footprint. Her signature approach involves integrating living walls, natural ventilation systems, and innovative water recycling mechanisms into high-rise buildings, which was considered nearly impossible just a decade ago. She heads the Department of Sustainable Design at the Architecture Institute and also runs her own award-winning firm.

My connection with Professor Chen is rather serendipitous. Three years ago, I was working on my undergraduate thesis about climate-responsive design, and a friend suggested I reach out to her for insights. To my surprise, she not only responded but invited me to observe one of her ongoing projects – a carbon-neutral office complex. That experience was absolutely eye-opening, and we’ve stayed in touch ever since. I’ve had the privilege of attending several of her lectures and even shadowing her team during site visits, which has given me invaluable first-hand exposure to how expertise manifests in practical settings.

What truly distinguishes Professor Chen as an exceptional expert goes far beyond her impeccable academic credentials – though she did earn her doctorate from the Bartlett School of Architecture and has authored three seminal textbooks that are now standard references in universities worldwide. What genuinely sets her apart is her holistic approach to architecture. She doesn’t view buildings in isolation but as integral components of larger urban ecosystems. For instance, her recent project, the Green Horizon Tower, achieved LEED Platinum certification while reducing construction costs by 20% through ingenious material selection and modular design principles – something most architects thought was mutually exclusive. This ability to reconcile seemingly contradictory goals – sustainability, aesthetics, and economic viability – demonstrates a level of mastery that few possess.

Moreover, her influence extends well beyond her built projects. She’s been instrumental in shaping environmental building codes in several Asian countries and has mentored over 200 architects who are now implementing sustainable practices globally. I think what I admire most about her is her unwavering conviction that expertise comes with responsibility. She regularly pro bono consults on low-income housing projects, ensuring that sustainable design isn’t just a luxury for the wealthy. This ethical dimension to her work, combined with her technical brilliance and track record of innovation, makes her, in my view, not just an expert but a true visionary in her field.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	8.5-9	Speaks fluently và coherently với virtually no hesitation. Sử dụng sophisticated cohesive devices một cách natural (rather serendipitous, to my surprise, moreover, for instance). Ideas được develop fully và logically with clear progression.
Lexical Resource	8.5-9	Uses vocabulary with full flexibility và precision. Wide range of less common và idiomatic phrases: luminary, pushing the boundaries, emulate natural systems, integral components, genuinely sets her apart, track record of innovation. Collocations hoàn hảo: impeccable credentials, seminal textbooks, ingenious material selection.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	8.5-9	Uses full range of structures với full flexibility và accuracy. Complex sentences với multiple subordinate clauses. Varied structures: cleft (What truly distinguishes…), participle clauses (ensuring that…), inversion. Virtually error-free.
Pronunciation	8.5-9	Uses wide range of pronunciation features với precision và subtlety. Intonation and stress patterns enhance meaning. Sustained performance với consistent clarity.

Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc

🎯 Fluency Hoàn Hảo:

Không có hesitation, pauses đều có mục đích (dramatic effect, emphasis)
Discourse markers sophisticated và varied (rather serendipitous, to my surprise, for instance, moreover)
Transition giữa các ý mượt mà và natural

📚 Vocabulary Tinh Vi:

“a luminary” – từ vựng literary, nâng cao hơn “expert” hoặc “leading figure”
“pushing the boundaries” – idiom natural cho innovation
“biomimetic architecture” – technical term chính xác, thể hiện knowledge
“emulate natural systems” – academic collocation thay vì “copy nature”
“minimal environmental footprint” – topic-specific phrase
“ingenious material selection” – sophisticated adjective choice
“track record of innovation” – business English collocation
“ethical dimension” – abstract noun phrase showing critical thinking

📝 Grammar Đa Dạng:

Cleft sentence: “What truly distinguishes…is…” (emphasis structure)
Participle clause: “ensuring that sustainable design isn’t just…” (showing result)
Relative clauses: “200 architects who are now implementing…”
Complex conditional implication: “something most architects thought was mutually exclusive”
Present perfect với time phrases: “for the better part of three decades”
Passive voice: “is considered”, “was thought”

💡 Ideas Sâu Sắc:

Không chỉ list achievements mà explain significance (LEED Platinum + cost reduction = reconciling contradictory goals)
Multi-dimensional analysis: academic credentials + practical impact + ethical responsibility
Personal connection described với vivid details (serendipitous, eye-opening, shadowing)
Critical thinking: “expertise comes with responsibility”, “not just an expert but a visionary”
Evidence hierarchy: credentials → projects → influence on field → ethical work

🎨 Structure Hoàn Hảo:

Introduction: Who + field + time (30 seconds)
Expertise details: What she does + signature approach (40 seconds)
How I know her: Story với vivid details (35 seconds)
Why expert: Credentials → Projects → Influence → Ethics (75 seconds)
Clear signposting: “What truly distinguishes”, “Moreover”, “I think what I admire most”

Thí sinh tự tin trình bày bài nói Part 2 IELTS với ghi chú chuẩn bị

Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)

Sau khi bạn hoàn thành phần độc thoại 2 phút, examiner thường hỏi 1-2 câu ngắn để “smooth transition” sang Part 3. Đây không phải là phần chính thức được chấm riêng nhưng vẫn góp phần vào overall impression.

Question 1: Would you like to work in the same field as this person?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, I think it would be interesting to work in that field. However, I know it requires a lot of study and hard work, so I’m not sure if I have enough ability to do it well.

Band 8-9 Answer:
That’s an intriguing question. While I’m genuinely drawn to sustainable architecture, I think I’m more suited to working at the intersection of technology and environmental science rather than pure design. That said, I’d love to collaborate with experts like Professor Chen on projects that require interdisciplinary approaches, where I could contribute my technical skills to support innovative sustainable solutions.

Question 2: Do you think this person enjoys their work?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, I believe she really enjoys her work. She always looks happy when talking about her projects and spends a lot of time on them even after work hours.

Band 8-9 Answer:
Absolutely, it’s quite evident from her infectious enthusiasm and the sheer passion she brings to every project. I think when you’re operating at that level of mastery, work transcends being just a job – it becomes deeply fulfilling on an intellectual and creative level. The fact that she continues to take on challenging projects and mentor others despite her success suggests she finds profound satisfaction in pushing the field forward.

Nếu bạn đang tìm kiếm cảm hứng về cách phân tích các vấn đề phức tạp, hãy xem thêm describe a law you think should be introduced để học cách trình bày ý kiến một cách có cấu trúc và thuyết phục.

IELTS Speaking Part 3: Two-way Discussion

Tổng Quan Về Part 3

Part 3 là phần thảo luận sâu kéo dài 4-5 phút, nơi examiner sẽ đặt những câu hỏi trừu tượng, phân tích và mang tính học thuật hơn liên quan đến chủ đề Part 2. Đây là phần phân biệt rõ ràng giữa band 6-7 và band 8-9.

Thời gian: 4-5 phút

Đặc điểm:

Câu hỏi abstract, theoretical, analytical
Yêu cầu critical thinking và ability to speculate
Tập trung vào social issues, trends, comparisons
Cần present balanced views và consider different perspectives

Yêu cầu:

Analyze issues từ nhiều góc độ (not just personal opinion)
Compare and contrast (past vs present, different groups, different countries)
Evaluate advantages/disadvantages, causes/effects
Speculate about future trends với reasonable justification
Support opinions với examples từ society, không chỉ cá nhân

Chiến lược hiệu quả:

Structure câu trả lời:

Direct answer (1 câu): State your position clearly
Main point 1 + reasoning + example (2-3 câu)
Main point 2 + reasoning + example (2-3 câu)
Concession/Alternative view (nếu phù hợp) (1-2 câu)
Conclusion/Summary (optional, 1 câu)

Language features cần có:

Discourse markers: Actually, In fact, To be honest, From my perspective
Tentative language: I’d say, It seems to me, I suppose, tend to, generally speaking
Emphasizers: particularly, especially, primarily, significantly
Contrast markers: However, On the other hand, Nevertheless, Conversely
Abstract nouns: expertise, proficiency, competence, dedication, innovation

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

Trả lời quá ngắn (1-2 câu) thiếu elaboration
Chỉ đưa ra personal examples thay vì societal observations
Không acknowledge complexity của issue (quá đơn giản hóa)
Thiếu từ vựng abstract và academic
Không dám express opinions do sợ sai
Sử dụng quá nhiều “I think” mà không vary expressions
Không có structure rõ ràng, nói lan man
Thiếu critical thinking, chỉ nói những gì obvious

Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu

Theme 1: Expertise and Society

Question 1: Why do you think some people become experts while others don’t?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: Cause and Effect / Explanation
Key words: some people vs others (comparison), become experts (process)
Cách tiếp cận:
- Analyze multiple factors (innate ability, dedication, opportunity, education)
- Balance nature vs nurture
- Acknowledge that it’s a combination, not single factor
- Use examples từ different fields

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think there are several reasons why some people become experts. First, they work very hard and practice a lot. For example, musicians need to practice every day for many years. Second, some people are naturally talented in certain areas, so it’s easier for them to become good at it. Also, having good teachers and opportunities to learn is important. People who don’t have these things may find it difficult to become experts even if they want to.

Phân tích:

Structure: Lists reasons với basic linking (First, Second, Also)
Vocabulary: Basic (work very hard, naturally talented, good teachers) nhưng adequate
Tại sao Band 6-7: Ideas relevant và có example nhưng thiếu depth of analysis, sophisticated vocabulary, và complex grammar

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Well, I think the development of expertise is actually the result of a complex interplay of several factors. First and foremost, there’s the element of sustained deliberate practice – experts don’t just put in time, they engage in focused, challenging practice that pushes them beyond their comfort zone. Research suggests it takes roughly 10,000 hours of this kind of intensive practice to achieve mastery in most fields, and frankly, not everyone has the perseverance to maintain that level of commitment.

Beyond that, environmental factors play a crucial role. Access to quality mentorship, adequate resources, and supportive infrastructure can dramatically accelerate someone’s path to expertise. We see this clearly in countries with robust educational systems versus those without – the gap in expert development is quite stark.

However, I’d also argue there’s an often overlooked psychological dimension. People who become experts typically possess what psychologists call a growth mindset – they view challenges as opportunities to improve rather than threats. They’re also intrinsically motivated, driven by genuine passion for their field rather than just external rewards. Conversely, those who don’t reach expert level might lack this internal drive or may succumb to the inevitable setbacks and frustrations that come with mastering complex skills.

All in all, I’d say expertise emerges when innate potential, opportunity, and psychological resilience converge – and that’s why it remains relatively rare even in fields with many practitioners.

Phân tích:

Structure: Well-organized với clear progression: practice → environment → psychology → conclusion. Uses sophisticated discourse markers (First and foremost, Beyond that, However, All in all)
Vocabulary: Precise và sophisticated: complex interplay, sustained deliberate practice, perseverance, robust educational systems, intrinsically motivated, converge, relatively rare
Grammar: Complex structures: passive (is the result of), relative clauses (who become experts), cleft (what psychologists call), present perfect (Research suggests), conditional implications
Critical Thinking: Multi-dimensional analysis (practice + environment + psychology), acknowledges research (10,000 hours), uses contrast (growth mindset vs fixed mindset), shows nuance (not just one factor)

💡 Key Language Features:

Discourse markers: Well, First and foremost, Beyond that, However, Conversely, All in all
Tentative language: I think, I’d also argue, I’d say, typically, suggests
Abstract nouns: development, interplay, perseverance, infrastructure, dimension, resilience
Collocations: sustained practice, environmental factors, growth mindset, intrinsic motivation

Question 2: Do you think expertise is more important than natural talent?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: Opinion + Comparison (expertise vs natural talent)
Key words: more important (comparative judgment), expertise vs natural talent
Cách tiếp cận:
- Don’t take extreme position (“completely agree/disagree”)
- Acknowledge both have value
- Discuss context-dependency (depends on field)
- Give examples for both sides
- Arrive at nuanced conclusion

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

That’s a difficult question. I think both are important. Natural talent can help people learn faster at the beginning, but expertise comes from long practice and experience. For example, someone with natural talent for music might learn quickly, but they still need to practice a lot to become a professional musician. So I think expertise is more important in the long run because anyone can develop it with hard work, but natural talent is limited to what you are born with.

Phân tích:

Structure: Acknowledges both sides, gives example, states conclusion
Vocabulary: Basic (learn faster, hard work, born with) nhưng communicates idea
Tại sao Band 6-7: Clear position và có reasoning, nhưng analysis chưa deep, thiếu sophisticated expressions, grammar còn simple

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

That’s quite a thought-provoking question, and I think the answer is considerably more nuanced than a simple either-or choice. From my perspective, the relationship between expertise and natural talent is more complementary than competitive.

On the one hand, natural talent undoubtedly provides a head start. People with innate abilities often grasp concepts more intuitively and may progress faster in the early stages of skill development. We see this in fields like sports or music, where physical attributes or perfect pitch can give individuals a distinct advantage. However, I’d argue that raw talent alone is rarely sufficient for achieving true mastery. History is full of prodigies who flamed out because they relied solely on their gifts without cultivating discipline and work ethic.

On the other hand, expertise – which I’d define as deep, experience-based knowledge combined with refined skills – can be developed through systematic effort regardless of initial talent levels. Research has shown that consistent, focused practice can compensate for modest natural abilities. In fact, many of the most successful experts in various fields aren’t necessarily the most naturally gifted, but they’re often the most persistent and methodical in their approach.

What I find particularly interesting is that in many professional contexts, expertise becomes exponentially more valuable as tasks become more complex. For instance, in fields like surgery or engineering, accumulated experience and refined judgment – both hallmarks of expertise – are infinitely more crucial than raw talent when high-stakes decisions are involved.

So to directly answer, I’d say expertise is generally more important because it’s developable, reliable, and sustainable over a career, whereas natural talent, while helpful, can plateau without the deliberate cultivation that builds true expertise. That said, the optimal scenario is when natural talent provides the foundation that expertise then builds upon – that’s when we see truly exceptional performance.

Phân tích:

Structure: Sophisticated organization: Acknowledge complexity → Discuss talent → Discuss expertise → Context-specific analysis → Nuanced conclusion. Perfect use of signposting.
Vocabulary: Highly sophisticated: thought-provoking, considerably more nuanced, complementary than competitive, grasp intuitively, distinct advantage, prodigies, flamed out, exponentially more valuable, plateau
Grammar: Full range: cleft sentences (What I find particularly interesting is…), relative clauses, passives, conditionals (That said…), gerunds (without cultivating), comparative structures (more…than)
Critical Thinking:
- Refuses simplistic answer (more nuanced than either-or)
- Defines terms (expertise = deep knowledge + refined skills)
- Uses research support (Research has shown)
- Provides counter-examples (prodigies who flamed out)
- Context-dependent analysis (in professional contexts, in surgery/engineering)
- Arrives at balanced, sophisticated conclusion (optimal scenario combines both)

💡 Key Language Features:

Opening gambits: That’s quite a thought-provoking question, From my perspective
Balanced discussion: On the one hand…On the other hand, That said
Emphasis: undoubtedly, rarely, infinitely more crucial, truly exceptional
Qualification: considerably, generally, often, many
Advanced vocabulary: complementary, innate abilities, prodigies, systematic effort, exponentially, plateau

Theme 2: Education and Expertise Development

Question 3: Should schools focus more on developing expertise in specific subjects or general knowledge?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: Opinion + Education policy (Should schools…)
Key words: expertise in specific subjects vs general knowledge
Cách tiếp cận:
- Discuss trade-offs của cả hai approaches
- Consider age/educational stage (primary vs secondary vs tertiary)
- Think about societal needs và individual development
- Provide concrete examples từ education systems
- Suggest balanced approach rather than extreme

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think schools should teach both specific subjects and general knowledge. Young students need to learn many different things to find out what they are interested in. If they only study one subject, they might miss other opportunities. But when students get older, like in high school or university, they should focus more on specific subjects they want to become experts in. This way, they can prepare for their future careers. However, general knowledge is still useful because it helps people communicate and understand the world better. So schools should balance both types of education.

Phân tích:

Structure: States position, explains reasoning for different stages, mentions both sides
Vocabulary: Basic educational terms (young students, high school, university, future careers)
Tại sao Band 6-7: Clear ideas và logical progression nhưng lacks sophisticated analysis, academic vocabulary, và grammatical complexity

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is actually a central debate in educational philosophy, and I believe the answer hinges on the educational stage we’re discussing. Rather than viewing expertise and general knowledge as mutually exclusive, I think the optimal approach varies with students’ developmental stages.

At the primary and early secondary levels, I’d strongly advocate for prioritizing broad-based education. Young learners need exposure to diverse fields to discover their aptitudes and interests. Moreover, foundational skills like critical thinking, communication, and basic literacy across multiple domains create the intellectual scaffolding that future expertise will rest upon. Think of it like building a house – you need a solid, broad foundation before you can erect specialized structures. Countries like Finland that emphasize holistic education in early years consistently produce well-rounded individuals who can adapt to various challenges.

However, as students progress into upper secondary and tertiary education, there’s a compelling case for increasing specialization. At this stage, students have typically identified their interests and need to develop the deep, specialized knowledge that characterizes expertise. The modern job market increasingly values T-shaped professionals – individuals with broad general knowledge (the horizontal bar) but also deep expertise in a specific domain (the vertical bar). Universities that offer concentrated major programs while requiring breadth requirements through general education courses seem to strike this balance effectively.

That being said, I think it would be shortsighted to create overly narrow specialists. Even in specialized fields, experts need contextual understanding from other disciplines. For instance, a software engineer benefits from understanding psychology for user experience design, or an economist needs historical perspective to interpret trends. This is why interdisciplinary approaches are gaining traction in cutting-edge institutions.

Ultimately, I’d argue for a progressive model where general education predominates in early years and gradually gives way to increasing specialization, but never entirely abandons the cultivation of broad intellectual horizons. This approach equips individuals to become experts while remaining intellectually flexible – a crucial combination in our rapidly evolving world.

Phân tích:

Structure: Masterful organization: Acknowledge complexity → Early education argument → Later education argument → Qualification → Synthesized conclusion. Uses sophisticated paragraph transitions.
Vocabulary: Academic và precise: central debate, hinges on, mutually exclusive, foundational skills, intellectual scaffolding, holistic education, T-shaped professionals, breadth requirements, shortsighted, interdisciplinary approaches, cutting-edge institutions, progressive model, intellectual horizons
Grammar: Full range với accuracy: relative clauses (that emphasize, who can adapt), conditional implications (if we create narrow specialists), gerunds (rather than viewing, before erecting), complex noun phrases (the deep specialized knowledge that characterizes expertise)
Critical Thinking:
- Refuses binary choice (rather than viewing as mutually exclusive)
- Stage-dependent analysis (primary vs secondary vs tertiary)
- Uses metaphor effectively (building a house)
- References real-world examples (Finland, T-shaped professionals)
- Acknowledges counterarguments (that being said, even in specialized fields)
- Synthesizes into sophisticated conclusion (progressive model)
- Shows awareness of broader context (modern job market, rapidly evolving world)

💡 Key Language Features:

Academic discourse: This is actually a central debate, hinges on, I’d strongly advocate for, There’s a compelling case for, Ultimately, I’d argue for
Sophisticated connectors: Rather than viewing, Moreover, However, That being said, Ultimately
Tentative language: I believe, I think, seem to, typically
Emphasis: strongly advocate, compelling case, crucial combination, entirely abandons
Abstract nouns: philosophy, approach, scaffolding, specialization, perspective, traction
Advanced collocations: central debate, mutually exclusive, foundational skills, holistic education, cutting-edge institutions, intellectual horizons

Thí sinh thảo luận chuyên sâu với giám khảo trong phần Part 3 IELTS Speaking

Theme 3: Expertise in the Modern World

Question 4: How has technology changed the way people develop expertise?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: How (Change/Impact analysis)
Key words: technology, changed, develop expertise
Cách tiếp cận:
- Compare past vs present methods
- Discuss multiple aspects (access, speed, tools, collaboration)
- Consider both positive và negative impacts
- Give specific examples of technologies
- Think about different fields

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Technology has changed how people become experts in many ways. Now, people can learn things online very easily. They can watch videos, take online courses, and read articles on the internet. Before, people had to go to schools or find teachers, which was more difficult. Also, technology gives people tools to practice their skills. For example, musicians can use apps to learn songs, and programmers can use computers to practice coding. However, there is also too much information online, so sometimes it’s hard to know what is good quality. Overall, I think technology makes it easier and faster for people to develop expertise.

Phân tích:

Structure: Makes comparison (now vs before), gives examples, mentions drawback, concludes
Vocabulary: Basic tech terms (online, videos, apps, computers, internet)
Tại sao Band 6-7: Relevant points và clear structure, nhưng lacks sophistication trong vocabulary, grammar, và depth of analysis

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Technology has fundamentally transformed the landscape of expertise development in ways that would have been unimaginable just a generation ago. The changes are multifaceted and, I’d say, quite profound.

Perhaps most significantly, technology has democratized access to knowledge. Previously, becoming an expert required gatekeepers – you needed admission to prestigious institutions or access to exclusive mentors. Now, world-class educational resources are available to anyone with an internet connection. Platforms like MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), YouTube tutorials, and specialized forums have leveled the playing field dramatically. A self-taught programmer in a remote village can now access the same learning materials as students at MIT, which represents a seismic shift in educational equity.

Moreover, technology has accelerated the learning process through immediate feedback mechanisms and adaptive learning systems. Consider language learning apps that use spaced repetition algorithms to optimize retention, or simulation software that allows surgeons to practice procedures without risk. These tools enable exponentially faster skill acquisition than traditional methods. Additionally, collaboration tools and online communities allow aspiring experts to connect with peers and mentors globally, transcending geographical limitations that once constrained expertise development.

However, I should note that technology has also introduced certain complications. The sheer volume of available information can be overwhelming, making it difficult to distinguish credible sources from dubious ones. There’s also a risk of what I’d call “shallow expertise” – people who’ve accumulated factual knowledge through online research but lack the deep practical experience and nuanced judgment that come from hands-on practice and real-world problem-solving. Technology can’t fully replace embodied learning and tacit knowledge that experts traditionally gained through apprenticeship models.

On balance, though, I’d say the transformation has been overwhelmingly positive. Technology hasn’t eliminated the need for dedication and hard work, but it’s removed many barriers and created pathways to expertise that were previously virtually inaccessible to the majority of people. The challenge now is learning to navigate this abundance effectively and integrate online resources with practical experience.

Phân tích:

Structure: Exemplary organization: Introduction establishes scope → Major positive change 1 (access) → Major positive change 2 (speed/tools) → Complications/drawbacks → Balanced conclusion. Perfect discourse management.
Vocabulary: Highly sophisticated: fundamentally transformed, multifaceted, quite profound, democratized access, gatekeepers, leveled the playing field, seismic shift, spaced repetition algorithms, transcending geographical limitations, shallow expertise, embodied learning, tacit knowledge, overwhelmingly positive
Grammar: Full range expertly deployed: passive (has been transformed, would have been unimaginable), present perfect (has democratized, has accelerated), relative clauses (that were virtually inaccessible), participle clauses (transcending limitations), conditional (can’t fully replace), gerunds (becoming an expert, learning to navigate)
Critical Thinking:
- Acknowledges scale of change (fundamentally transformed, unimaginable)
- Multi-dimensional analysis (access + speed + tools + collaboration)
- Specific examples with details (MOOCs, spaced repetition, simulation software)
- Acknowledges complexity (However, certain complications)
- Introduces sophisticated concept (shallow expertise, embodied learning, tacit knowledge)
- Balanced evaluation (overwhelmingly positive but with challenges)
- Forward-looking (The challenge now is…)

💡 Key Language Features:

Opening: Has fundamentally transformed, I’d say
Signposting: Perhaps most significantly, Moreover, However, On balance
Emphasis: quite profound, dramatically, exponentially faster, overwhelmingly positive
Qualification: I should note, I’d call, virtually inaccessible
Academic collocations: democratized access, leveled the playing field, seismic shift, immediate feedback mechanisms, adaptive learning systems, distinguish credible sources
Abstract nouns: transformation, landscape, equity, retention, complications, abundance

Question 5: Do you think people respect experts as much as they did in the past?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: Opinion + Comparison (past vs present) + Social trend analysis
Key words: respect experts, as much as, in the past
Cách tiếp cận:
- Compare attitudes past vs present
- Analyze reasons for any changes
- Consider different contexts/fields
- Discuss implications
- Balance with counter-examples

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

That’s a fascinating question that touches on some significant social shifts we’ve been witnessing. I’d argue that the relationship between the public and experts has become considerably more complicated rather than simply declining in respect.

On one level, there does seem to be a troubling erosion of expert authority in certain domains, particularly contentious areas like public health, climate science, and economics. We’re seeing an alarming trend where people feel emboldened to dismiss scientific consensus based on anecdotal evidence or ideologically-motivated sources. Social media has amplified this phenomenon by creating echo chambers where non-expert opinions can gain disproportionate visibility. The phrase “I did my own research” has almost become a euphemism for rejecting expert guidance, which I find quite concerning. This represents a departure from earlier eras when expert credentials carried almost unquestioned authority.

However, I think we need to nuance this picture somewhat. In many ways, what we’re seeing isn’t purely disrespect but rather a healthy skepticism toward institutional expertise that has sometimes proven fallible. History shows us cases where expert consensus was wrong or where experts served vested interests rather than public good. The increasing scrutiny of expertise can actually be viewed as a maturing of public discourse – people are asking “Who funded this research?” and “What are the limitations of this study?” These are legitimate questions that can strengthen rather than undermine genuine expertise.

Moreover, I’d note that respect for expertise remains remarkably high in certain spheres. When people need surgery, they still defer completely to medical experts. When building bridges or flying planes, engineering expertise is implicitly trusted. What seems to have changed is that expertise in areas touching on values, politics, or lifestyle choices faces more pushback, while technical expertise in clearly non-ideological domains retains its authority.

What I find particularly interesting is that we’re possibly witnessing a redefinition rather than a rejection of what constitutes expertise. The public increasingly values demonstrated competence and transparent communication over mere credentials. Experts who can engage authentically, acknowledge uncertainty, and explain their reasoning seem to retain public trust, while those who adopt a “trust me, I’m an expert” stance struggle to connect.

So to summarize, I’d say respect for expertise hasn’t universally declined but has become more conditional and context-dependent. This shift is partly problematic (when it enables science denial) but also partly healthy (when it encourages genuine accountability and accessible communication from experts). The challenge is distinguishing between constructive skepticism and destructive anti-intellectualism – and that’s something society is still grappling with.

Phân tích:

Structure: Masterclass organization: Introduction establishes complexity → Evidence of decline → Counter-argument/nuance → Context-specific analysis → Deeper insight about redefinition → Sophisticated summary
Vocabulary: Exceptional range: erosion of authority, contentious areas, emboldened to dismiss, echo chambers, euphemism for, departure from, nuance this picture, proven fallible, served vested interests, maturing of public discourse, implicitly trusted, non-ideological domains, constructive skepticism, destructive anti-intellectualism, grappling with
Grammar: Full mastery: passive constructions (has become, we’ve been witnessing, has been wrong), perfect tenses (has become, has sometimes proven), gerunds (distinguishing between, rejecting expert), relative clauses (where people feel, who can engage), conditionals (when it enables), participle clauses (touching on values)
Critical Thinking:
- Refuses simplistic answer (more complicated rather than simply declining)
- Multi-layered analysis (decline in some areas, high in others)
- Historical perspective (departure from earlier eras, history shows us)
- Introduces sophisticated distinction (healthy skepticism vs disrespect)
- Context-dependent analysis (technical vs value-laden expertise)
- Identifies underlying shift (redefinition of expertise)
- Balanced conclusion acknowledging both positive and negative aspects
- Meta-awareness (society is still grappling with)

💡 Key Language Features:

Sophisticated openings: That’s a fascinating question, I’d argue that, On one level, However
Critical thinking phrases: we need to nuance this picture, can be viewed as, What I find particularly interesting, The challenge is distinguishing between
Academic vocabulary: erosion, contentious, amplified this phenomenon, disproportionate, euphemism, fallible, maturing of discourse, implicitly trusted, grappling with
Balanced discussion: On one level…However, partly problematic…partly healthy
Examples of precision: “I did my own research” (cultural reference với critical analysis)

Để hiểu rõ hơn về cách áp dụng tư duy phản biện trong nhiều tình huống khác nhau, bạn có thể tham khảo describe a challenging task you completed at work or school nơi kỹ năng phân tích và giải quyết vấn đề được thể hiện rõ nét.

Theme 4: Future of Expertise

Question 6: How do you think artificial intelligence will affect expertise in the future?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

Dạng: Speculation về future + Impact analysis
Key words: artificial intelligence, will affect, expertise, future
Cách tiếp cận:
- Acknowledge current AI developments
- Speculate về potential impacts (both positive and negative)
- Consider different fields/types of expertise
- Discuss how expertise might evolve/adapt
- Show awareness of uncertainty

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is undoubtedly one of the most pressing questions of our time, and I think we’re standing at a truly transformative juncture. While any prediction comes with considerable uncertainty, I can envision several plausible scenarios for how AI might reshape the landscape of expertise.

In the short to medium term, I believe AI will act as an amplifier of human expertise rather than a replacement. We’re already seeing this with AI tools that augment expert capabilities – radiologists using AI to detect subtle anomalies in medical scans, lawyers employing AI to sift through vast case law, architects using generative design algorithms to explore possibilities no human could manually generate. In these scenarios, expertise is being redefined – it’s becoming less about rote knowledge retention and more about sophisticated judgment, contextual understanding, and the ability to leverage AI tools effectively. The experts of the future might be those who can synergize human intuition with machine processing power.

However, certain types of expertise face existential disruption. Codifiable expertise – knowledge that can be articulated as rules and patterns – is particularly vulnerable to AI replacement. We’re seeing this in fields like basic translation, routine legal document preparation, or even some aspects of medical diagnosis. Professions that relied primarily on information asymmetry – knowing things others don’t – are finding that asymmetry collapsing as AI makes knowledge more accessible. This means many traditional experts may need to pivot toward skills that remain distinctly human: emotional intelligence, ethical reasoning, creative problem-solving, and nuanced judgment in ambiguous situations.

Paradoxically, I think AI might actually increase the value of certain types of deep expertise. As AI handles routine tasks, there’ll be heightened demand for experts who can tackle complex, novel problems that defy algorithmic solutions. Moreover, we’ll need a new category of experts – those who understand AI systems deeply enough to design, audit, and ethically govern them. AI literacy is likely to become a foundational layer of expertise across almost all fields, much like computer literacy became essential in the late 20th century.

Looking further ahead, we might see the emergence of what I’d call “hybrid expertise” – humans deeply integrated with AI systems, where the boundaries blur. Think of brain-computer interfaces or augmented reality systems that provide real-time expert knowledge. At that point, we might need to fundamentally reconsider what we even mean by human expertise.

The ethical implications are also profound. If AI can replicate expert performance in many domains, how do we ensure that expertise remains accessible rather than concentrated among those who can afford the most advanced AI tools? How do we maintain human agency and critical oversight when decisions are mediated by AI?

To sum up, I don’t think AI will eliminate expertise, but it will dramatically transform its nature. The experts who thrive will be those who embrace AI as a tool while cultivating the irreducibly human dimensions of their craft – creativity, empathy, ethical reasoning, and the wisdom that comes from lived experience. The challenge for society is ensuring this transition happens equitably and with appropriate safeguards.

Phân tích:

Structure: Outstanding organization: Introduction establishes significance → Short-term scenario → Threats/disruptions → Paradoxical opportunities → Longer-term speculation → Ethical considerations → Comprehensive conclusion
Vocabulary: Exceptional sophistication: pressing questions, transformative juncture, considerable uncertainty, envision plausible scenarios, amplifier of human expertise, codifiable expertise, existential disruption, information asymmetry, pivot toward, defy algorithmic solutions, foundational layer, hybrid expertise, brain-computer interfaces, irreducibly human dimensions, lived experience
Grammar: Mastery level: complex conditionals (If AI can replicate), future forms (will act, might be), passive (is being redefined), gerunds (using AI, sift through, leverage tools), relative clauses (who understand, that defy), participle clauses (mediated by AI)
Critical Thinking:
- Acknowledges uncertainty (any prediction comes with considerable uncertainty)
- Multi-timeframe analysis (short-term, however, looking further ahead)
- Dialectical thinking (AI as amplifier vs. existential threat)
- Introduces paradox (might actually increase value of certain expertise)
- Creates new concept (hybrid expertise, irreducibly human dimensions)
- Considers ethical implications separately
- Multiple perspectives (different fields, different types of expertise)
- Sophisticated conclusion integrating multiple threads

💡 Key Language Features:

Future speculation: I believe, I can envision, We might see, I don’t think…but, will be those who
Sophisticated connectors: In the short to medium term, However, Paradoxically, Looking further ahead, To sum up
Academic precision: codifiable expertise, information asymmetry, algorithmic solutions, foundational layer, irreducibly human dimensions
Nuanced language: considerable uncertainty, plausible scenarios, particularly vulnerable, distinctly human, heightened demand, profound implications
Abstract concepts: synergize, leverage, pivot toward, defy, replicate, mediated

Chuyên gia sử dụng trí tuệ nhân tạo để nâng cao hiệu quả công việc và ra quyết định

Từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng

Topic-Specific Vocabulary

Từ vựng/Cụm từ	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ	Collocation
expertise	n	/ˌekspɜːˈtiːz/	chuyên môn, sự thành thạo	His expertise in data analysis is widely recognized.	develop expertise, demonstrate expertise, build expertise, draw on expertise
proficiency	n	/prəˈfɪʃənsi/	sự thành thạo, trình độ cao	She has achieved remarkable proficiency in three languages.	achieve proficiency, demonstrate proficiency, language proficiency, high level of proficiency
mastery	n	/ˈmɑːstəri/	sự thành thạo hoàn hảo	True mastery takes years of dedicated practice.	achieve mastery, demonstrate mastery, mastery of, complete mastery
luminary	n	/ˈluːmɪneri/	nhân vật kiệt xuất, người nổi bật	She is a luminary in the field of neuroscience.	leading luminary, scientific luminary, intellectual luminary
authority	n	/ɔːˈθɒrəti/	chuyên gia có uy tín	He is a leading authority on Renaissance art.	leading authority, recognized authority, authority on, establish authority
renowned	adj	/rɪˈnaʊnd/	nổi tiếng, có danh tiếng	She is renowned for her groundbreaking research.	internationally renowned, widely renowned, renowned for, world-renowned
acclaimed	adj	/əˈkleɪmd/	được ca ngợi, được công nhận	The acclaimed surgeon has performed thousands of successful operations.	critically acclaimed, widely acclaimed, internationally acclaimed, highly acclaimed
pioneering	adj	/ˌpaɪəˈnɪərɪŋ/	tiên phong, đi đầu	His pioneering work revolutionized the industry.	pioneering research, pioneering work, pioneering approach, pioneering spirit
cutting-edge	adj	/ˌkʌtɪŋ ˈedʒ/	tiên tiến nhất, tân tiến	She works with cutting-edge technology.	cutting-edge research, cutting-edge technology, cutting-edge techniques, cutting-edge approach
groundbreaking	adj	/ˈɡraʊndbreɪkɪŋ/	đột phá, mang tính cách mạng	Their groundbreaking study changed medical practice.	groundbreaking research, groundbreaking work, groundbreaking discovery, groundbreaking approach
profound	adj	/prəˈfaʊnd/	sâu sắc, thâm trầm	He has a profound understanding of quantum physics.	profound knowledge, profound understanding, profound impact, profound insight
extensive	adj	/ɪkˈstensɪv/	rộng rãi, sâu rộng	She has extensive experience in clinical psychology.	extensive experience, extensive knowledge, extensive research, extensive background
remarkable	adj	/rɪˈmɑːkəbl/	đáng chú ý, xuất sắc	His remarkable ability to simplify complex concepts is admired.	remarkable achievement, remarkable ability, remarkable progress, remarkable talent
innate	adj	/ɪˈneɪt/	bẩm sinh,타고난	Some people have an innate talent for music.	innate ability, innate talent, innate skill, innate capacity
seasoned	adj	/ˈsiːzənd/	dày dạn kinh nghiệm	A seasoned professional knows how to handle pressure.	seasoned expert, seasoned professional, seasoned practitioner, seasoned veteran
adept	adj	/əˈdept/	thành thạo, giỏi	She is highly adept at solving complex problems.	highly adept, remarkably adept, adept at, particularly adept
credential	n	/krɪˈdenʃl/	bằng cấp, chứng chỉ	His impressive credentials include a PhD from Oxford.	academic credentials, professional credentials, impressive credentials, establish credentials
accolade	n	/ˈækəleɪd/	giải thưởng, sự tán dương	She has received numerous accolades for her contributions.	receive accolades, win accolades, numerous accolades, prestigious accolades
accomplishment	n	/əˈkʌmplɪʃmənt/	thành tựu	Her accomplishments in the field are well-documented.	major accomplishment, significant accomplishment, notable accomplishment, impressive accomplishment
aptitude	n	/ˈæptɪtjuːd/	năng khiếu, thiên hướng	He showed an early aptitude for mathematics.	natural aptitude, aptitude for, demonstrate aptitude, exceptional aptitude

Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases

Cụm từ	Nghĩa	Ví dụ sử dụng	Band điểm
at the forefront of	đi đầu, tiên phong trong	She is at the forefront of cancer research.	7.5-9
push the boundaries	mở rộng giới hạn, đột phá	His work pushes the boundaries of what we thought possible.	7.5-9
break new ground	tạo ra bước đột phá mới	The study breaks new ground in understanding the human brain.	7.5-9
in a league of their own	ở đẳng cấp khác biệt	When it comes to violin performance, she’s in a league of her own.	8-9
second to none	không ai sánh được	His expertise in tax law is second to none.	7.5-9
have a firm grasp of	nắm vững, hiểu sâu	She has a firm grasp of economic principles.	7-8
stay abreast of	cập nhật, theo kịp	Experts must stay abreast of the latest developments.	7.5-9
think outside the box	suy nghĩ sáng tạo, không theo틀	True experts can think outside the box when solving problems.	7-8
ahead of the curve	dẫn đầu xu hướng	She’s always ahead of the curve in adopting new technologies.	7.5-9
set the standard	đặt ra tiêu chuẩn	Her research has set the standard for the entire field.	7.5-9
pave the way for	mở đường cho	His pioneering work paved the way for future discoveries.	7.5-9
make strides in	tiến bộ vượt bậc trong	Medical science has made significant strides in treating the disease.	7.5-9
bridge the gap	thu hẹp khoảng cách	He bridges the gap between theory and practice.	7.5-9
hands-on experience	kinh nghiệm thực tế	Years of hands-on experience make her an invaluable mentor.	7-8
learning curve	quá trình học hỏi	The learning curve for this skill is quite steep.	7-8
trial and error	thử và sai, học qua kinh nghiệm	Much of expertise comes from trial and error.	6-7
depth of knowledge	chiều sâu kiến thức	His depth of knowledge on the subject is impressive.	7.5-8
track record	thành tích, hồ sơ thành công	She has an excellent track record of successful projects.	7.5-9

Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)

Để bắt đầu câu trả lời:

📝 Well,… – Tốt thôi (khi cần một giây suy nghĩ)
📝 Actually,… – Thực ra là (khi đưa ra góc nhìn khác hoặc correction)
📝 To be honest,… – Thành thật mà nói (khi nói ý kiến cá nhân thẳng thắn)
📝 I’d say that… – Tôi sẽ nói rằng (khi đưa ra quan điểm)
📝 From my perspective,… – Theo quan điểm của tôi
📝 In my experience,… – Theo kinh nghiệm của tôi

Để bổ sung ý:

📝 On top of that,… – Thêm vào đó
📝 What’s more,… – Hơn nữa
📝 Not to mention… – Chưa kể đến
📝 Beyond that,… – Ngoài ra
📝 Moreover,… – Hơn thế nữa
📝 Furthermore,… – Thêm nữa

Để đưa ra quan điểm cân bằng:

📝 On the one hand,… On the other hand,… – Một mặt… Mặt khác
📝 While it’s true that…, we also need to consider… – Mặc dù đúng là… nhưng chúng ta cũng cần xem xét
📝 That being said,… – Dù vậy thì
📝 Having said that,… – Nói như vậy thì
📝 Conversely,… – Ngược lại

Để kết luận:

📝 All in all,… – Tóm lại
📝 At the end of the day,… – Cuối cùng thì
📝 Ultimately,… – Sau cùng
📝 To sum up,… – Tóm tắt lại
📝 In conclusion,… – Kết luận

Để nhấn mạnh:

📝 What I find particularly interesting is… – Điều tôi thấy đặc biệt thú vị là
📝 The key point is… – Điểm mấu chốt là
📝 It’s worth noting that… – Điều đáng chú ý là
📝 I should emphasize that… – Tôi nên nhấn mạnh rằng

Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng

1. Conditional Sentences (Câu điều kiện):

Mixed conditional (Hỗn hợp):

Formula: If + Past Perfect, Subject + would/could + V (base form)
Ví dụ: “If she hadn’t devoted so much time to practice, she wouldn’t be such an accomplished pianist today.”
Ứng dụng: Nói về cause trong quá khứ và effect ở hiện tại

Inversion (Đảo ngữ):

Formula: Had + Subject + Past Participle, Subject + would/could + V
Ví dụ: “Had he not pursued his PhD, he might never have become the leading authority he is today.”
Ứng dụng: Formal style, thể hiện band 8-9

2. Relative Clauses (Mệnh đề quan hệ):

Non-defining (không xác định):

Formula: …, which/who + verb…
Ví dụ: “Dr. Chen, who has published over 50 papers, is considered a luminary in her field.”
Ứng dụng: Thêm thông tin không essential nhưng interesting

Reduced relative clauses:

Formula: Noun + V-ing/V-ed…
Ví dụ: “Experts working in this field face numerous challenges.” / “The methods developed by pioneers have shaped modern practice.”
Ứng dụng: More concise, sophisticated

3. Passive Voice (Câu bị động):

Impersonal passive:

It is thought/believed/said/considered that…
Ví dụ: “It is widely believed that expertise requires at least 10,000 hours of deliberate practice.”
Ứng dụng: Present general opinions without saying “people think”

Advanced passive structures:

Formula: Subject + is/are said/thought/believed to + V
Ví dụ: “She is said to be one of the most influential experts in artificial intelligence.”
Ứng dụng: More elegant than simple passive

4. Cleft Sentences (Câu chẻ):

What-cleft:

Formula: What + Subject + V… is/are…
Ví dụ: “What distinguishes true experts from amateurs is their ability to think critically under pressure.”
Ứng dụng: Emphasize important information

It-cleft:

Formula: It is/was… that/who…
Ví dụ: “It was her dedication and perseverance that led to her becoming an expert.”
Ứng dụng: Focus on specific element

The thing/reason-cleft:

Formula: The thing/reason that… is…
Ví dụ: “The reason that some people develop expertise faster is their consistent, focused practice.”
Ứng dụng: Explain causes or important points

5. Gerunds and Infinitives (Danh động từ và Nguyên mẫu):

Gerund as subject:

Formula: V-ing + verb…
Ví dụ: “Becoming an expert requires tremendous dedication and years of practice.”
Ứng dụng: Make abstract concepts concrete

Complex gerund structures:

Formula: By V-ing…, Subject + verb…
Ví dụ: “By consistently pushing himself beyond his comfort zone, he developed extraordinary expertise.”
Ứng dụng: Show how/method

6. Advanced Comparative Structures:

The + comparative, the + comparative:

Formula: The + comparative + Subject + V, the + comparative + Subject + V
Ví dụ: “The more practice you put in, the more proficient you become.”
Ứng dụng: Show correlation

Not so much… as…:

Formula: Not so much… as…
Ví dụ: “Expertise is not so much about innate talent as about sustained effort and dedication.”
Ứng dụng: Emphasize one aspect over another

Khi luyện tập kỹ năng phát triển ý tưởng, bạn có thể tham khảo describe a time when you did something creative để học cách diễn đạt quá trình sáng tạo và problem-solving một cách sinh động.

Chiến lược trả lời và lời khuyên từ Examiner

Chiến Lược Tổng Quát Cho Cả 3 Parts

1. Fluency & Coherence (Độ trôi chảy và mạch lạc):

Những điều NÊN làm:

✅ Nói với tốc độ tự nhiên (120-150 từ/phút), không quá nhanh hoặc chậm
✅ Tự sửa lỗi một cách tự nhiên nếu cần (“I mean…”, “or rather…”)
✅ Sử dụng discourse markers để liên kết ý (However, Moreover, Actually)
✅ Duy trì eye contact định kỳ (không nhìn chằm chằm hoặc tránh nhìn)
✅ Pausing tự nhiên giữa các ý (không phải hesitation do thiếu từ)
✅ Develop ý đầy đủ, không nhảy lung tung giữa các topics

Những điều TRÁNH:

❌ Nói quá nhanh do lo lắng (sẽ mất điểm pronunciation và clarity)
❌ Hesitation quá nhiều với “um”, “uh”, “er” (1-2 lần/phút là acceptable)
✅ Repeat câu hỏi để lấy thời gian (Band 5-6 behavior)
❌ Dừng đột ngột giữa câu hoặc ý chưa hoàn chỉnh
❌ Sử dụng memorized answers (examiners dễ nhận ra)

Insight từ Examiner:
“Nhiều học viên Việt Nam nói quá nhanh vì lo lắng, dẫn đến pronunciation unclear và examiner khó theo dõi. Thà nói chậm và rõ ràng hơn là nói nhanh nhưng nhiều lỗi. Một pause để suy nghĩ khoảng 2-3 giây là hoàn toàn acceptable và natural.”

2. Lexical Resource (Từ vựng):

Những điều NÊN làm:

✅ Paraphrase từ trong câu hỏi (expert → specialist, authority, luminary)
✅ Sử dụng collocations tự nhiên (deep knowledge, hands-on experience)
✅ Vary vocabulary trong cùng một topic (không repeat “good” 5 lần)
✅ Sử dụng idiomatic expressions một cách appropriate (2-3 lần trong Part 2-3)
✅ Self-correct nếu dùng sai từ (“remarkable… or rather, extraordinary”)
✅ Sử dụng less common words nhưng accurately (không dùng từ không chắc nghĩa)

Những điều TRÁNH:

❌ Overuse các từ basic: good, bad, important, interesting
❌ Dùng từ quá formal hoặc academic không phù hợp với speaking (“utilise” thay vì “use”)
❌ Sử dụng idioms quá nhiều hoặc không phù hợp context
❌ Lặp lại từ vựng nhiều lần (especially adjectives)
❌ Dùng big words sai nghĩa để impress examiner

Insight từ Examiner:
“Band 7 vs Band 8 thường phân biệt ở precision và flexibility của vocabulary. Band 7 có thể nói ‘he’s very good at teaching’, Band 8 sẽ nói ‘he has a remarkable ability to convey complex concepts’. Không phải về số lượng từ khó mà về sử dụng chính xác và natural.”

3. Grammatical Range & Accuracy (Ngữ pháp):

Những điều NÊN làm:

✅ Mix simple, compound và complex sentences tự nhiên
✅ Sử dụng varied tenses phù hợp (không stuck ở simple present/past)
✅ Dùng conditional sentences (2nd, 3rd, mixed) khi appropriate
✅ Incorporate passive voice và relative clauses
✅ Attempt complex structures (cleft sentences, inversion) trong Part 3
✅ Self-correct grammar errors nếu nhận ra

Những điều TRÁNH:

❌ Chỉ dùng simple sentences (Subject + Verb + Object)
❌ Sai basic grammar (subject-verb agreement, articles)
❌ Overuse một cấu trúc (ví dụ: “I think…” ở mọi câu)
❌ Dùng complex structures sai để impress (worse than using simple correctly)
❌ Tense shifting không logic (past → present → past trong cùng một story)

Insight từ Examiner:
“Một lỗi nhỏ về articles (a/an/the) ở Band 7-8 là acceptable và natural. Nhưng multiple errors với basic tenses hoặc subject-verb agreement sẽ cap score ở Band 6. Trong Part 3, nếu bạn chỉ dùng simple sentences, maximum là Band 6.5 dù vocabulary tốt.”

4. Pronunciation (Phát âm):

Những điều NÊN làm:

✅ Focus vào clarity hơn là accent hoàn hảo (British hay American đều OK)
✅ Word stress chính xác (EXpert không phải exPERT)
✅ Sentence stress và intonation tự nhiên (không flat/monotone)
✅ Connected speech features tự nhiên (wanna, gonna trong informal contexts)
✅ Speak clearly với appropriate volume
✅ Vary intonation để express enthusiasm, doubt, emphasis

Những điều TRÁNH:

❌ Nói quá nhỏ hoặc mumble (examiner phải strain to hear)
❌ Flat intonation (robot-like)
❌ Stress mọi từ equally (không có rhythm)
❌ Mispronounce key topic words (expert, expertise, authority)
❌ Mix British và American pronunciation inconsistently (color vs colour)

Insight từ Examiner:
“Pronunciation không phải về British hay American accent. Band 8-9 pronunciation là về clarity, natural intonation, và appropriate stress. Một Vietnamese accent hoàn toàn OK nếu clear. Điều quan trọng là examiner không phải strain to understand, và bạn sử dụng intonation để convey meaning (không chỉ words).”

Chiến Lược Cụ Thể Cho Part 2

Trong 1 phút chuẩn bị:

Bước 1 (15 giây): Đọc kỹ đề và gạch chân keywords

Identify: Who, What, How, Why
Circle: “explain” part (quan trọng nhất)

Bước 2 (40 giây): Note-taking strategy

Who: Dr. Minh (AI expert)
What: AI/healthcare, medical imaging
How: university lecture → mentor
Why: - PhD MIT + 50 papers
     - systems in hospitals
     - passion for teaching
     - National Prize

Tips cho notes:

Chỉ viết keywords/phrases, không viết câu
Dùng symbols (→ = then, ✓ = good point)
Note 2-3 từ vựng nâng cao bạn muốn dùng (ví dụ: “pioneering”, “tangible impact”)
Đánh số thứ tự các bullet points

Bước 3 (5 giây): Breathe và visualize structure

Introduction: 2 câu
Bullet 1-2-3: 3-4 câu mỗi phần
Explain: 5-6 câu (dài nhất)
Conclusion: 1-2 câu

Trong 2 phút nói:

Opening (15 seconds):

Engaging start: “I’d like to talk about…” / “Let me tell you about…”
Brief overview: Who they are + what field
Avoid: “The person I want to talk about is…” (too template-like)

Example:
✅ “I’d like to tell you about Professor Chen, who’s a luminary in sustainable architecture.”
❌ “The person I will describe is my teacher. She teaches English.”

Body (90-100 seconds):

Allocate time: 20-25 seconds per bullet point
Use transition phrases: “As for how I know her…”, “What makes her an expert…”
Include specific details (numbers, names, examples)
Show enthusiasm through intonation

Explain section (40 seconds):

This is where Band 7-8-9 is decided
Multiple layers: credentials + achievements + qualities + impact
Use sophisticated structures: “What truly distinguishes her is…”, “Beyond just her qualifications…”
Examples: “For instance…”, “To give you an example…”

Conclusion (10 seconds):

Natural wrap-up, not forced
Can express personal feeling: “That’s why I really admire…”
Or future-looking: “I hope to learn more from her in the future.”

Timing tips:

Glance at watch/clock quickly at 1-minute mark
If under 1.5 minutes, expand “explain” part spontaneously
If reaching 2 minutes, wrap up naturally (examiner will stop you anyway)

Common mistakes trong Part 2:

Mistake 1: Unequal development
❌ “Who: 40 seconds, What: 30 seconds, How: 20 seconds, Why: 10 seconds”
✅ Balanced với emphasis on “explain”

Mistake 2: Too general
❌ “He is very good at his job and knows a lot.”
✅ “He has pioneered biomimetic architecture in Southeast Asia, with his designs achieving LEED Platinum certification.”

Mistake 3: No examples
❌ “She’s a great teacher.”
✅ “She’s a great teacher – for instance, 90% of her students achieve Band 7+, and many credit her with transforming their approach to IELTS.”

Mistake 4: Memorized template
❌ “I’m going to talk about… Firstly… Secondly… Thirdly… In conclusion…”
✅ Natural flow với varied expressions

Chiến Lược Cụ Thể Cho Part 3

Understanding question types và strategies:

1. Opinion questions (Do you think…? / Do you agree…?)

Structure:

Direct answer (1 câu)
→ Reason 1 + explanation/example (2-3 câu)
→ Reason 2 + explanation/example (2-3 câu)
→ [Optional] Concession/alternative view (1-2 câu)
→ [Optional] Conclusion (1 câu)

Language:

Start: “I’d say…”, “From my perspective…”, “I think…”
Develop: “The main reason is…”, “Another factor is…”, “What’s more…”
Balance: “However…”, “That said…”, “On the flip side…”

Example:
“Do you think young people respect experts?”

✅ Band 8-9 answer:
“I’d say the relationship is quite nuanced. On the one hand, there’s evidence of skepticism – young people tend to question authority more than previous generations, partly due to social media exposing expert mistakes. However, I’d also argue this reflects healthy critical thinking rather than pure disrespect. What’s interesting is that young people still deeply respect demonstrated expertise – they just expect experts to communicate authentically rather than rely solely on credentials. So overall, it’s less about disrespect and more about changing expectations of how expertise should be presented.”

2. Comparison questions (How does X compare to Y? / What’s the difference…?)

Structure:

Acknowledge both sides
→ Aspect 1: X vs Y + example
→ Aspect 2: X vs Y + example
→ [Optional] Overall assessment

Language:

Start: “There are several key differences…”, “They differ in several ways…”
Compare: “While X…, Y…”, “In contrast to…”, “Whereas…”, “On the other hand…”
Example: “For instance…”, “Take X as an example…”

Example:
“How is expertise developed now compared to the past?”

✅ Band 8-9 answer:
“There are quite stark contrasts between traditional and modern expertise development. Traditionally, becoming an expert required access to exclusive institutions and mentors – there were real gatekeepers. In contrast, modern technology has democratized access dramatically through MOOCs and online resources. Another difference lies in the pace – historically, expertise required decades of apprenticeship, whereas now, targeted online learning can accelerate certain skills development. However, I’d note that depth of expertise – particularly tacit knowledge and judgment – still requires time and hands-on experience regardless of era. So while the accessibility and speed have changed, the fundamental need for deliberate practice remains constant.”

3. Cause/Effect questions (Why…? / What causes…? / What are the effects…?)

Structure:

Identify main cause/effect
→ Cause/Effect 1 + explanation + example
→ Cause/Effect 2 + explanation + example
→ [Optional] Additional factors

Language:

Causes: “stems from”, “is due to”, “results from”, “can be attributed to”
Effects: “leads to”, “results in”, “has led to”, “brings about”, “consequences include”
Multiple: “First and foremost…”, “Additionally…”, “Another factor…”

Example:
“Why do some fields have more experts than others?”

✅ Band 8-9 answer:
“This primarily stems from several interrelated factors. First and foremost, economic incentives play a huge role – fields with high financial rewards naturally attract more people willing to invest in developing expertise. For instance, we see abundant experts in finance and tech because the returns justify years of intensive study. Beyond that, accessibility of knowledge matters – fields with well-established educational pathways and abundant learning resources tend to produce more experts. Conversely, niche fields with limited training infrastructure struggle to build expert communities. What’s also significant is societal perception – prestigious fields attract more aspirants, creating a virtuous cycle where more experts lead to better institutions, which produce even more experts. So it’s really a complex interplay of economics, infrastructure, and social factors.”

4. Future/Speculation questions (How will…? / What might happen…?)

Structure:

Acknowledge uncertainty
→ Likely scenario 1 + reasoning
→ Likely scenario 2 + reasoning
→ [Optional] Qualification/alternative

Language:

Uncertainty: “It’s hard to say for certain, but…”, “While it’s difficult to predict…”
Speculation: “I imagine…”, “I’d expect…”, “It’s likely that…”, “We might see…”, “Could potentially…”
Conditional: “If current trends continue…”, “Assuming that…”, “Provided that…”

Example:
“How will expertise change in the future?”

✅ Band 8-9 answer:
“While it’s difficult to predict with certainty, I can envision several plausible scenarios. Most likely, we’ll see expertise becoming more specialized and interdisciplinary simultaneously – specialists will need deeper knowledge in narrow domains but also broader awareness of adjacent fields. AI will probably act as an expertise amplifier rather than replacement, meaning future experts will be those who can synergize human judgment with machine capabilities. I’d also expect the definition of expertise itself to evolve – less emphasis on rote knowledge retention, more emphasis on complex problem-solving and ethical reasoning. If current trends continue, we might also see democratization accelerate, with expertise becoming less tied to traditional credentials and more to demonstrated competence. That said, certain fundamentals – like the need for deliberate practice and hands-on experience – will likely remain constant regardless of technological advances.”

Advanced techniques for Band 8-9:

Technique 1: Acknowledge complexity

“This is actually a quite complex issue…”
“The reality is more nuanced than it might appear…”
“I think we need to consider multiple perspectives here…”

Technique 2: Use academic framing

“Research suggests that…”
“Studies have shown…”
“Evidence indicates…”
(Không cần cite specific studies, chỉ cần reference general knowledge)

Technique 3: Show critical thinking

“On the surface it seems…, but actually…”
“While many people think X, I’d argue…”
“The conventional wisdom is…, however…”

Technique 4: Meta-commentary

“What I find particularly interesting about this is…”
“The fascinating thing here is…”
“I think the key insight is…”

Technique 5: Qualify statements

“To some extent…”, “To a large degree…”
“Generally speaking…”, “By and large…”
“In most cases…”, “Typically…”

Recovering từ mistakes:

Nếu không hiểu câu hỏi:
✅ “Sorry, could you rephrase that question?”
✅ “I’m not entirely sure I understood – are you asking about…?”
❌ “What?” / “Huh?” / Long silence

Nếu blank mind:
✅ “That’s an interesting question. Let me think… (2 second pause)”
✅ “Well, from my perspective…” (buy time while formulating)
❌ “I don’t know” / “I have no idea”

Nếu phát hiện nói sai:
✅ “…or rather, I should say…”
✅ “What I mean is…”
✅ “To put it more precisely…”
❌ Ignore it hoặc apologize excessively

Nếu examiner looks confused:
✅ “To clarify what I mean…”
✅ “Let me explain that differently…”
❌ Continue talking without addressing confusion

Để nâng cao khả năng thảo luận về các không gian và môi trường, hãy xem describe a place where you go to spend time outdoors nơi bạn có thể học cách miêu tả địa điểm một cách sinh động và hấp dẫn.

Lộ Trình Luyện Tập Hiệu Quả

Giai Đoạn 1: Foundation (1-2 tuần đầu)

Mục tiêu: Hiểu rõ format, tiêu chí chấm, và build vocabulary foundation

Hoạt động:

Nghiên cứu band descriptors (2-3 giờ)
- Đọc kỹ official IELTS band descriptors cho cả 4 tiêu chí
- So sánh samples ở các band khác nhau
- Identify gaps trong skills của bạn
Build vocabulary bank (5-7 giờ/tuần)
- Học 15-20 từ vựng topic-specific mỗi ngày
- Practice collocations với example sentences
- Record pronunciation và practice saying them
- Create flashcards với Anki hoặc Quizlet
Listen actively (30 phút/ngày)
- IELTS Speaking samples band 7-9
- TED Talks về related topics
- Podcasts (The English We Speak, 6 Minute English)
- Note down useful expressions và structures
Shadow native speakers (20 phút/ngày)
- Listen to a short clip (30-60 seconds)
- Repeat exactly như họ nói (intonation, stress, pace)
- Record yourself và compare
- Focus on natural connected speech

Giai Đoạn 2: Skill Development (2-3 tuần)

Mục tiêu: Develop speaking fluency và apply vocabulary trong context

Hoạt động:

Part 1 Practice (15 phút/ngày)
- Practice 5-8 Part 1 questions daily
- Record answers và listen back
- Time yourself (aim for 20-30 seconds per answer)
- Identify và fix repeated words/phrases
- Focus on natural elaboration (Direct answer → Reason → Example)
Part 2 Practice (30 phút/ngày)
- Practice 1-2 cue cards daily
- Strict timing: 1 minute preparation, 2 minutes speaking
- Record và transcribe một phần answer
- Analyze: vocabulary range, grammar structures, coherence
- Rerecord với improvements
- Practice note-taking strategy
Part 3 Practice (20 phút/ngày)
- Practice 3-4 Part 3 questions
- Focus on analytical thinking (not just personal opinions)
- Practice structuring complex answers
- Use sophisticated discourse markers
- Develop arguments with examples từ society
Grammar drills (15 phút/ngày)
- Focus on 1-2 advanced structures each week
- Week 1: Conditionals (mixed, inversion)
- Week 2: Cleft sentences và relative clauses
- Week 3: Passive forms và gerund/infinitive structures
- Create example sentences về expertise topic
Pronunciation practice (15 phút/ngày)
- Word stress patterns (EXpertise, exPERT, proFICiency)
- Sentence stress và rhythm
- Intonation patterns (questions, lists, emphasis)
- Record và compare với native speakers
- Use apps: ELSA Speak, Speechling

Giai Đoạn 3: Integration & Refinement (2-3 tuần)

Mục tiêu: Integrate all skills, simulate test conditions, refine performance

Hoạt động:

Full mock tests (2-3 lần/tuần)
- Complete Part 1-2-3 trong 11-14 phút (test duration)
- Record entire session
- Strict timing và không stop/restart
- Use actual IELTS questions từ recent tests
- Practice với timer visible (simulating pressure)
Self-assessment (sau mỗi mock test)
- Listen to recording multiple times
- Fill out assessment form cho cả 4 criteria:
  - Fluency: Hesitations? Repetitions? Natural pace?
  - Vocabulary: Range? Precision? Collocations? Paraphrasing?
  - Grammar: Variety? Accuracy? Complex structures?
  - Pronunciation: Clarity? Word stress? Intonation?
- Identify top 3 areas for improvement
- Create action plan cho next practice
Feedback sessions (1-2 lần/tuần)
- Practice với study partner hoặc tutor
- Exchange recordings với partners online (IELTS communities)
- Get detailed feedback trên specific aspects
- Focus on 1-2 improvement areas per session
- Video record để analyze body language và eye contact
Targeted improvement (45 phút/ngày)
- Based on self-assessment, focus practice
- Nếu Fluency issue: More shadowing, speed reading aloud, thinking in English
- Nếu Vocabulary issue: Intensive vocabulary study, synonym exercises, paraphrasing practice
- Nếu Grammar issue: Grammar drills, error correction, complex sentence construction
- Nếu Pronunciation issue: Minimal pairs, stress patterns, intonation practice
Topic expansion (30 phút/ngày)
- Study 2-3 related topics (education, technology, success, careers)
- Build topic-specific vocabulary banks
- Practice connecting ideas across topics
- Prepare flexible examples có thể adapt cho multiple questions

Giai Đoạn 4: Test Preparation (1 tuần trước thi)

Mục tiêu: Polish performance, build confidence, manage test anxiety

Hoạt động:

Final mock tests (mỗi ngày)
- Complete mock test daily
- Simulating real test conditions hoàn toàn:
  - Dress formally
  - Sit in different room (không phải study space)
  - Use phone/computer camera như examiner
  - No pausing hoặc restarting
- Focus on consistency hơn là trying new things
Review và consolidate (1 giờ/ngày)
- Review tất cả vocabulary learned
- Practice favorite examples và stories
- Refine answers cho common Part 1 questions
- Polish 2-3 flexible Part 2 stories
- Prepare frameworks cho common Part 3 question types
Mental preparation (20 phút/ngày)
- Visualization exercises (imagine successful test)
- Breathing exercises cho test anxiety
- Positive affirmations
- Review successful recordings (build confidence)
- Sleep well (8 hours minimum)
Logistics preparation
- Confirm test date, time, location
- Plan route và transportation
- Prepare required documents
- Plan outfit (comfortable, professional)
- Pack water, snacks for waiting time

Weekly Practice Schedule (Sample)

Monday:

Morning: Part 1 practice (15 min) + Vocabulary (30 min)
Afternoon: Grammar drills (20 min) + Listening (30 min)
Evening: Part 2 practice (30 min) + Shadowing (20 min)

Tuesday:

Morning: Part 3 practice (30 min) + Pronunciation (20 min)
Afternoon: Full mock test (45 min including setup)
Evening: Self-assessment (30 min) + Planning (15 min)

Wednesday:

Morning: Part 1 practice (15 min) + Vocabulary (30 min)
Afternoon: Targeted improvement based on assessment (45 min)
Evening: Part 2 practice (30 min) + Shadowing (20 min)

Thursday:

Morning: Part 3 practice (30 min) + Grammar drills (20 min)
Afternoon: Listening (30 min) + Pronunciation (20 min)
Evening: Part 2 practice (30 min) + Topic expansion (20 min)

Friday:

Morning: Full mock test (45 min)
Afternoon: Self-assessment (30 min) + Feedback session (30 min)
Evening: Targeted practice (30 min) + Relaxation

Saturday:

Morning: Part 1 + Part 3 practice (45 min)
Afternoon: Vocabulary review (30 min) + Grammar review (30 min)
Evening: Watching TED Talks (30 min) + Shadowing (20 min)

Sunday:

Morning: Light review (30 min)
Afternoon: Recreation (allow brain to consolidate)
Evening: Planning cho week ahead (30 min)

Total: 10-12 giờ/tuần (manageable alongside work/study)

Resources Recommendations

Speaking Practice Platforms:

iTalki / Preply: Find IELTS tutors cho feedback sessions (2-3 sessions/week recommended)
Cambly: Practice với native speakers (focus on fluency, not test prep)
HelloTalk / Tandem: Language exchange apps (free practice)
IELTS Liz / IELTS Simon: Free high-quality samples và tips
YouTube Channels: IELTS Official, E2 IELTS, IELTS Advantage

Vocabulary Building:

Academic Word List (AWL): Essential cho Part 3 academic discussion
IELTS Vocabulary Booster Apps: Magoosh, IELTS Prep App
Collocations Dictionary: Oxford Collocations Dictionary online
Topic-based wordlists: English Profile, C1/C2 vocabulary lists

Pronunciation Tools:

ELSA Speak: AI-powered pronunciation feedback
Speechling: Free pronunciation coaching
Rachel’s English (YouTube): American pronunciation
BBC Learning English: British pronunciation
YouGlish: See how words are pronounced trong real contexts

Grammar Resources:

Grammar in Use Advanced (Cambridge): Reference và practice
English Grammar Profile (Cambridge): B2-C2 structures
Perfect English Grammar: Free online resource với clear explanations

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Pitfall 1: Over-reliance on memorized answers
❌ Learning template answers by heart
✅ Prepare flexible frameworks và examples có thể adapt

Pitfall 2: Neglecting pronunciation
❌ Focusing only on vocabulary và grammar
✅ Daily pronunciation practice with recording

Pitfall 3: Not timing practice
❌ Speaking as long as you want during practice
✅ Strict timing từ beginning (Part 1: 20-30s, Part 2: 2 min, Part 3: 30-45s per answer)

Pitfall 4: Practicing alone exclusively
❌ Never getting external feedback
✅ Regular feedback sessions với tutors/partners (at least weekly)

Pitfall 5: Ignoring Part 1 & Part 3
❌ Focusing 90% effort trên Part 2 cue card
✅ Balanced practice across all 3 parts (Part 3 is equally important)

Pitfall 6: Not recording yourself
❌ Practicing without recording
✅ Record every practice session và listen critically

Pitfall 7: Giving up when making mistakes
❌ Stopping hoặc apologizing excessively
✅ Self-correcting naturally và continuing confidently

Pitfall 8: Cramming new vocabulary before test
❌ Learning 100 new words 2 days before test
✅ Consolidating familiar vocabulary trong last week

Mindset for Success

Growth Mindset:

Mistakes are learning opportunities, không phải failures
Progress không phải linear – plateaus are normal
Compare với bản thân past, không phải với others
Celebrate small improvements daily

Test Day Mindset:

Examiner wants you to succeed (they’re not adversaries)
It’s a conversation, không phải interrogation
Band 7-8 không cần perfect – natural fluency with occasional minor errors is OK
Show your best, không phải perfect version of yourself

Self-compassion:

Anxious feelings are normal và acceptable
Preparation has equipped you với tools needed
One test không phải define your worth hoặc intelligence
You can always retake if needed (it’s not life-or-death)

Chúc bạn thành công với IELTS Speaking! Hãy nhớ rằng việc trở thành một “expert” trong IELTS Speaking cũng giống như bất kỳ chuyên môn nào khác – đòi hỏi deliberate practice, consistent effort, và willingness to learn from mistakes. Với lộ trình và chiến lược đúng đắn, bạn hoàn toàn có thể đạt được band điểm mục tiêu!

IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe a Person Who is an Expert in a Particular Field” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

IELTS Speaking Part 1: Introduction and Interview

Tổng Quan Về Part 1

Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp

Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết

IELTS Speaking Part 2: Long Turn (Cue Card)

Tổng Quan Về Part 2

Cue Card

Phân Tích Đề Bài

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7

Phân Tích Band Điểm

📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8

Phân Tích Band Điểm

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc

Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)

IELTS Speaking Part 3: Two-way Discussion

Tổng Quan Về Part 3

Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu

Theme 1: Expertise and Society

Theme 2: Education and Expertise Development

Theme 3: Expertise in the Modern World

Theme 4: Future of Expertise

Từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng

Topic-Specific Vocabulary

Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases

Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)

Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng

Chiến lược trả lời và lời khuyên từ Examiner

Chiến Lược Tổng Quát Cho Cả 3 Parts

Chiến Lược Cụ Thể Cho Part 2

Chiến Lược Cụ Thể Cho Part 3

Lộ Trình Luyện Tập Hiệu Quả

Giai Đoạn 1: Foundation (1-2 tuần đầu)

Giai Đoạn 2: Skill Development (2-3 tuần)

Giai Đoạn 3: Integration & Refinement (2-3 tuần)

Giai Đoạn 4: Test Preparation (1 tuần trước thi)

Weekly Practice Schedule (Sample)

Resources Recommendations

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Mindset for Success

IELTS Reading: Vai Trò Không Gian Xanh Trong Quy Hoạch Đô Thị - Đề Thi Mẫu Có Đáp Án Chi Tiết

IELTS Writing Task 2: Quy Định Khí Thải Công Nghiệp – Bài Mẫu Band 5-9 & Phân Tích Chi Tiết

Leave a Comment Cancel

Read Next

IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe a time when you disagreed with a friend” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe A Time When You Were Very Surprised” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe A Time When You Attended A Workshop” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

Đăng ký nhận thông tin bài mẫu