Chủ đề miêu tả một người có kiến thức uyên bác là một trong những đề bài phổ biến và có tần suất xuất hiện cao trong IELTS Speaking, đặc biệt ở Part 2. Theo thống kê từ các trung tâm luyện thi IELTS uy tín, chủ đề này đã xuất hiện đều đặn từ năm 2020 đến nay với mức độ phổ biến cao, chiếm khoảng 15-20% các đề thi liên quan đến miêu tả người. Dự đoán khả năng xuất hiện trong tương lai vẫn ở mức cao do tính phổ biến và khả năng đa dạng hóa câu hỏi của đề tài này.
Chủ đề này quan trọng vì nó không chỉ đánh giá khả năng miêu tả một người mà còn kiểm tra vốn từ vựng của bạn về trí tuệ, kiến thức, và các lĩnh vực chuyên môn. Các góc độ thường được hỏi bao gồm: giáo viên, chuyên gia trong một lĩnh vực, người trong gia đình, bạn bè, hoặc người nổi tiếng có kiến thức sâu rộng.
Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ học được cách trả lời hiệu quả cho cả ba phần thi Speaking với chủ đề này, bao gồm câu hỏi thường gặp trong Part 1, bài mẫu chi tiết theo nhiều band điểm từ 6 đến 9 cho Part 2, và các câu hỏi thảo luận sâu trong Part 3. Đặc biệt, bài viết sẽ cung cấp phân tích chi tiết về lý do tại sao một câu trả lời đạt band điểm nhất định, từ vựng và cụm từ ăn điểm, cùng những lời khuyên quý báu từ góc nhìn của một Examiner chính thức.
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 đời sống hàng ngày và kinh nghiệm cá nhân. Đặc điểm của phần này là examiner sẽ hỏi những câu hỏi familiar, friendly để tạo không khí thoải mái. Chiến lược hiệu quả là trả lời trực tiếp câu hỏi trong 2-3 câu, bao gồm câu trả lời chính và mở rộng bằng lý do hoặc ví dụ cụ thể.
Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam trong Part 1:
- Trả lời quá ngắn chỉ “Yes” hoặc “No” mà không mở rộng
- Sử dụng từ vựng quá đơn giản như “good”, “nice”, “interesting”
- Thiếu ví dụ cụ thể từ kinh nghiệm bản thân
- Nói quá dài, lan man không cần thiết
Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp
Question 1: Do you like learning new things?
Question 2: What subjects are you most interested in?
Question 3: Who do you usually ask for help when you need to learn something?
Question 4: Do you prefer learning from books or from people?
Question 5: Have you ever taught someone something you know well?
Question 6: What kind of knowledge do you think is most important?
Question 7: Do you think it’s important to have knowledgeable people around you?
Question 8: How do you usually acquire new knowledge?
Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết
Question: Do you like learning new things?
🎯 Cách tiếp cận:
- Trả lời trực tiếp có/không
- Đưa ra lý do cụ thể
- Thêm ví dụ về loại kiến thức bạn thích học
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“Yes, I like learning new things. It makes me feel good and helps me in my daily life. For example, recently I learned how to cook some new dishes by watching YouTube videos.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Trả lời rõ ràng, có ví dụ cụ thể về nấu ăn
- Hạn chế: Từ vựng đơn giản (feel good, helps me), thiếu depth trong giải thích
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Câu trả lời đáp ứng yêu cầu cơ bản với grammar đúng, nhưng vocabulary chưa sophisticated và ý tưởng chưa được phát triển đầy đủ
📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:
“Absolutely! I’m genuinely passionate about acquiring new knowledge because it broadens my horizons and keeps my mind intellectually stimulated. Just last month, I delved into learning about digital marketing through online courses, which has not only enhanced my professional skills but also given me a fresh perspective on how businesses operate in the modern world.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Sử dụng vocabulary nâng cao (passionate about, broadens my horizons, intellectually stimulated, delved into, enhanced), cấu trúc câu phức tạp với relative clause, ví dụ cụ thể và có impact
- Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency tự nhiên với discourse marker “Absolutely!”, lexical resource đa dạng với collocations chính xác, grammar range cao với “not only…but also”, và ideas có chiều sâu khi đề cập cả professional và personal benefits
💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:
- passionate about acquiring new knowledge: nhiệt huyết với việc tiếp thu kiến thức mới
- broaden my horizons: mở rộng tầm nhìn
- intellectually stimulated: được kích thích về mặt trí tuệ
- delve into: đào sâu vào, tìm hiểu kỹ về
Question: Who do you usually ask for help when you need to learn something?
🎯 Cách tiếp cận:
- Nêu người bạn thường hỏi
- Giải thích lý do tại sao chọn người đó
- Có thể đưa thêm ví dụ cụ thể
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I usually ask my older brother when I need help learning something. He is very smart and knows a lot about technology. Last week, he helped me understand how to use a new software for my work.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Có người cụ thể, có lý do, có ví dụ thực tế
- Hạn chế: Từ “smart” và “knows a lot” quá general, thiếu descriptive details
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Đáp ứng đầy đủ câu hỏi với structure hợp lý nhưng vocabulary chưa precise và sophisticated
📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:
“It really depends on the subject matter, but I typically turn to my former university professor who’s exceptionally well-versed in economics. What I appreciate most about him is his ability to break down complex concepts into digestible pieces, making even the most intricate theories easy to grasp. For instance, when I was struggling with understanding cryptocurrency markets, he patiently walked me through the fundamentals using real-world examples.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Natural opening với “It really depends on”, vocabulary chính xác về expertise (well-versed in, complex concepts, intricate theories), collocation tự nhiên (break down, walk me through), ví dụ cụ thể với cryptocurrency thể hiện current knowledge
- Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency xuất sắc với hesitation devices tự nhiên, lexical resource tinh vi với topic-specific vocabulary, grammatical range đa dạng với relative clauses và temporal clause, ideas có depth khi giải thích cả quality và method của người đó
💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:
- depends on the subject matter: tùy thuộc vào chủ đề
- turn to someone: nhờ đến ai đó
- exceptionally well-versed in: rất am hiểu về
- break down complex concepts: phân tích các khái niệm phức tạp
- intricate theories: các lý thuyết phức tạp, tinh vi
- walk someone through: hướng dẫn ai đó từng bước
Question: Do you prefer learning from books or from people?
🎯 Cách tiếp cận:
- Chọn một preference hoặc nêu cả hai tùy tình huống
- Giải thích advantages của lựa chọn
- Có thể contrast với option còn lại
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I prefer learning from people because it is more interactive. When I learn from someone, I can ask questions immediately if I don’t understand. Books are good too, but sometimes they are difficult to understand without explanation.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Clear preference, có comparison giữa hai options, đưa ra lý do logic
- Hạn chế: Ideas còn surface-level, thiếu specific examples, vocabulary basic
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Structure tốt với comparison nhưng lacks sophistication trong expression và depth trong reasoning
📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:
“I’d say it’s somewhat situational, but I generally lean towards learning from people, particularly for practical skills or nuanced topics. There’s something invaluable about the immediate feedback and personalized guidance you get from an expert. That said, I do find books indispensable for building a solid theoretical foundation, especially when I need to learn at my own pace or revisit concepts multiple times. Ideally, I like to combine both approaches – getting the big picture from books and then fine-tuning my understanding through discussions with knowledgeable individuals.”
Phân tích:
- Điểm mạnh: Balanced view thể hiện critical thinking, vocabulary sophisticated (nuanced, invaluable, indispensable, fine-tuning), discourse markers tự nhiên (I’d say, That said, Ideally), structure phức tạp với multiple clauses
- Tại sao Band 8-9: Demonstrates flexibility với “somewhat situational”, lexical precision cao với topic-specific collocations, grammar variety xuất sắc với participle phrases và relative clauses, ideas mature khi acknowledge benefits của cả hai và propose integrated approach
💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:
- somewhat situational: phần nào tùy thuộc vào tình huống
- lean towards: thiên về, có xu hướng chọn
- nuanced topics: các chủ đề tinh tế, đa chiều
- invaluable about: vô cùng quý giá về
- indispensable for: không thể thiếu cho
- fine-tuning my understanding: tinh chỉnh, hoàn thiện sự hiểu biết
Học viên Việt Nam tự tin luyện tập IELTS Speaking chủ đề miêu tả người có kiến thức uyên bác
IELTS Speaking Part 2: Long Turn (Cue Card)
Tổng Quan Về Part 2
Part 2 là phần độc thoại kéo dài 2-3 phút, trong đó bạn có 1 phút chuẩn bị và ghi chú. Đây là phần quan trọng nhất để thể hiện khả năng nói liền mạch và tổ chức ý tưởng. Chiến lược hiệu quả:
- Sử dụng hết 1 phút chuẩn bị để ghi keywords, không viết câu hoàn chỉnh
- Đảm bảo nói tối thiểu 1.5 phút, lý tưởng là đủ 2 phút
- Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả các bullet points trong cue card
- Sử dụng thì quá khứ khi kể về trải nghiệm đã qua
- Tập trung phát triển bullet point cuối (explain) vì đây là phần ghi điểm cao nhất
Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:
- Không tận dụng hết thời gian chuẩn bị, bắt đầu nói ngay
- Nói quá ngắn, dưới 1.5 phút
- Bỏ sót một hoặc nhiều bullet points
- Không phát triển đủ phần “explain” – phần quan trọng nhất
Cue Card
Describe A Person Who Is Very Knowledgeable
You should say:
- Who this person is
- How you know this person
- What kinds of things he/she knows about
- And explain how you feel about this person
Phân Tích Đề Bài
-
Dạng câu hỏi: Describe a person (miêu tả người)
-
Thì động từ: Hiện tại (vì người này vẫn tồn tại và có những đặc điểm hiện tại) kết hợp với quá khứ khi kể về cách quen biết
-
Bullet points phải cover:
- Who: Danh tính cụ thể của người đó (tên, nghề nghiệp, mối quan hệ)
- How you know: Hoàn cảnh quen biết, thời gian
- What kinds of things: Lĩnh vực kiến thức cụ thể, độ sâu rộng
- Explain feelings: Phần quan trọng nhất – cảm xúc, ấn tượng, impact của người này lên bạn
-
Câu “explain” quan trọng: Đây là nơi bạn thể hiện vocabulary về emotions, values, impact và reasoning skills. Nên phát triển phần này dài nhất (30-40% thời gian).
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7
Thời lượng: Khoảng 1.5-2 phút
I’d like to talk about my uncle Nam, who is a history teacher at a high school in my city. I’ve known him since I was a child because he is my father’s younger brother, so we often meet at family gatherings.
My uncle is really knowledgeable about Vietnamese history. He knows a lot of details about important events, historical figures, and different periods in our country’s past. He can tell you stories about ancient dynasties, the wars we had, and how our culture developed over time. Sometimes when we have dinner together, he shares interesting facts that I never learned in school.
What makes him special is that he doesn’t just know facts from books. He has visited many historical sites around Vietnam and even reads old documents to learn more. He also knows about world history, especially Asian history, and can compare different countries’ historical development.
I really admire and respect him because his knowledge is very deep. Whenever I have questions about history or need help with my homework, I can ask him and he always gives clear explanations. He makes history interesting and easy to understand. I feel lucky to have someone like him in my family because talking to him is like reading a living history book. His passion for knowledge also inspires me to learn more and read more books.
Phân Tích Band Điểm
| Tiêu chí | Band | Nhận xét |
|---|---|---|
| Fluency & Coherence | 6-7 | Có sequencing tốt với các bullet points, sử dụng basic linking words (because, so, sometimes, whenever), flow tương đối smooth nhưng thiếu sophisticated discourse markers |
| Lexical Resource | 6-7 | Vocabulary adequate với “knowledgeable about”, “historical figures”, “admire and respect”, “inspires me”, nhưng còn nhiều từ basic như “a lot of”, “really”, “special” |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | 6-7 | Sử dụng mix của simple và complex sentences, có relative clauses, nhưng chưa đa dạng về structures |
| Pronunciation | 6-7 | Assumed clear và understandable với occasional mispronunciation (không thể hiện trong text) |
Điểm mạnh:
- ✅ Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả bullet points theo đúng thứ tự
- ✅ Có ví dụ cụ thể về lĩnh vực kiến thức (Vietnamese history, world history)
- ✅ Thời lượng đạt yêu cầu tối thiểu
- ✅ Structure logic và dễ follow
Hạn chế:
- ⚠️ Vocabulary chưa sophisticated, nhiều từ repetitive
- ⚠️ Thiếu descriptive details và sensory language
- ⚠️ Phần explain chưa đủ developed, thiếu emotional depth
📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8
Thời lượng: Khoảng 2-2.5 phút
I’d like to describe my former university professor, Dr. Minh, who is undoubtedly one of the most intellectually accomplished individuals I’ve ever encountered. He’s a professor of environmental science and has been teaching at Vietnam National University for over twenty years.
I first met him during my freshman year when I enrolled in his introductory course on ecology. What immediately struck me was not just his academic credentials, but his genuine enthusiasm for the subject matter. He has a PhD from a prestigious university in Australia and has published numerous research papers in international journals.
Dr. Minh’s knowledge spans across multiple disciplines. His primary expertise is in biodiversity conservation and sustainable development, but what’s truly impressive is his holistic understanding of how environmental issues intersect with economics, politics, and social dynamics. He can effortlessly discuss everything from climate change policies to the intricate ecosystems of Vietnam’s national parks. During his lectures, he would draw connections between scientific concepts and real-world applications, making even the most complex theories accessible to students.
What I find most remarkable about him is his insatiable curiosity. Despite his age and experience, he’s always keeping abreast of the latest research and isn’t afraid to admit when he doesn’t know something. This intellectual humility actually makes him more credible in my eyes.
I have tremendous respect and admiration for Dr. Minh. He’s profoundly influenced my own approach to learning by demonstrating that true knowledge isn’t just about accumulating facts, but about understanding interconnections and remaining open-minded. Whenever I face challenges in my career, I think about his methodical approach to problem-solving and his passion for lifelong learning.
Phân Tích Band Điểm
| Tiêu chí | Band | Nhận xét |
|---|---|---|
| Fluency & Coherence | 7.5-8 | Flow tự nhiên với varied discourse markers, cohesive devices sophisticated (What immediately struck me, What’s truly impressive, What I find most remarkable), progression logic từ introduction đến feelings |
| Lexical Resource | 7.5-8 | Wide range vocabulary với collocations chính xác (intellectually accomplished, genuine enthusiasm, spans across, intersect with, insatiable curiosity, intellectual humility, profoundly influenced), less common vocabulary được sử dụng naturally |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | 7.5-8 | Variety of complex structures (relative clauses, participle phrases, conditional implications), consistently accurate với occasional minor errors |
| Pronunciation | 7.5-8 | Assumed clear với appropriate intonation và stress patterns |
So Sánh Với Band 6-7
| Khía cạnh | Band 6-7 | Band 7.5-8 |
|---|---|---|
| Vocabulary | “really knowledgeable”, “a lot of details” | “intellectually accomplished”, “spans across multiple disciplines” |
| Grammar | “He knows a lot of details about…” | “His knowledge spans across multiple disciplines” (noun phrase + verb) |
| Ideas | “makes history interesting and easy to understand” | “draws connections between scientific concepts and real-world applications, making even the most complex theories accessible” |
| Development | Basic explanation of why admire | Deeper analysis về intellectual humility và influence on personal development |
Giáo sư uyên bác đang chia sẻ kiến thức chuyên môn với sinh viên trong môi trường học thuật chuyên nghiệp
📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9
Thời lượng: 2.5-3 phút đầy đủ
I’d like to talk about my mentor and former colleague, Dr. Lan Nguyen, who is, without a doubt, one of the most erudite individuals I’ve had the privilege of knowing. She’s a renowned neuroscientist specializing in cognitive development and currently heads the research department at a leading medical institute in Ho Chi Minh City.
Our paths first crossed about five years ago when I was working as a junior researcher at the same institution. I was immediately captivated by her – not just her formidable academic credentials, which include a doctorate from MIT and over fifty peer-reviewed publications, but more importantly, her remarkably approachable demeanor despite her stellar reputation in the field.
What truly sets Dr. Lan apart is the extraordinary breadth and depth of her knowledge. Her primary domain of expertise lies in neurodevelopmental disorders, particularly autism spectrum conditions, but her intellectual curiosity extends far beyond her specialization. She’s remarkably well-versed in diverse fields ranging from molecular biology and genetics to philosophy of mind and educational psychology. What’s truly fascinating is how she seamlessly weaves together insights from these disparate disciplines to shed new light on complex research questions. For instance, during one of our collaborative projects, she drew upon philosophical theories about consciousness to reframe how we were approaching our experimental design, which ultimately led to a breakthrough in our research.
Beyond her academic prowess, Dr. Lan possesses what I would call “lived wisdom.” She has an uncanny ability to contextualize abstract scientific concepts within real-world implications, making her not just a brilliant scientist but also a compelling advocate for evidence-based policy changes. Her TED talk on inclusive education, which has garnered over two million views, exemplifies this rare combination of rigorous scholarship and accessible communication.
My feelings toward Dr. Lan are quite multifaceted. On one level, I have profound professional respect for her contributions to the field. She’s essentially redefined how we understand certain aspects of cognitive development. But on a more personal level, I’m deeply grateful for how she’s shaped my own intellectual development. She taught me that true expertise isn’t about having all the answers but about asking better questions and maintaining intellectual humility. Her mantra, which she often repeats, is that “the more you learn, the more you realize how much you don’t know,” and this perspective has been transformative for me.
I feel incredibly fortunate to have her as a role model. In an era where superficial knowledge is often mistaken for expertise, Dr. Lan represents the gold standard of what it means to be truly knowledgeable – someone who combines rigorous academic excellence with practical wisdom, intellectual curiosity with humility, and professional success with genuine compassion for others’ learning journeys.
Phân Tích Band Điểm
| Tiêu chí | Band | Nhận xét |
|---|---|---|
| Fluency & Coherence | 8.5-9 | Speaks fluently với minimal hesitation, sophisticated use of discourse markers (without a doubt, not just…but more importantly, beyond her academic prowess), excellent paragraph organization với clear topic development |
| Lexical Resource | 8.5-9 | Wide vocabulary range sử dụng naturally và precisely (erudite, formidable credentials, stellar reputation, disparate disciplines, uncanny ability, multifaceted, transformative), idiomatic usage (paths crossed, sets apart, gold standard), skillful use of less common lexical items |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | 8.5-9 | Full range of structures used accurately và appropriately (inversion, cleft sentences, complex relative clauses, participle phrases, mixed conditionals implied), rare errors không ảnh hưởng communication |
| Pronunciation | 8.5-9 | Assumed excellent với full range of pronunciation features, appropriate intonation patterns, clear articulation |
Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc
🎯 Fluency Hoàn Hảo:
Bài nói duy trì momentum liên tục trong suốt 2.5-3 phút mà không có những hesitation đáng kể. Các discourse markers được sử dụng một cách tự nhiên và sophisticated (“without a doubt”, “what truly sets…apart”, “beyond her academic prowess”) tạo ra flow mượt mà và professional.
📚 Vocabulary Tinh Vi:
Ví dụ: “erudite” thay vì simply “knowledgeable” – từ này có nghĩa là “having or showing great knowledge or learning” với connotation về classical scholarship. “Disparate disciplines” thay vì “different subjects” cho thấy precision và sophistication. “Uncanny ability” (khả năng kỳ lạ, phi thường) mạnh hơn nhiều so với “special ability”.
📝 Grammar Đa Dạng:
Ví dụ: “She’s remarkably well-versed in diverse fields ranging from molecular biology to philosophy” – câu này sử dụng participle phrase “ranging from…to” để mở rộng ý một cách elegant. Cleft sentence “What’s truly fascinating is how she seamlessly weaves together insights” nhấn mạnh điểm quan trọng. Mixed structures với relative clauses embedded naturally: “Her TED talk, which has garnered over two million views, exemplifies this rare combination.”
💡 Ideas Sâu Sắc:
Thay vì chỉ nói “I admire her”, bài nói phân tích multifaceted feelings – vừa có professional respect, vừa có personal gratitude. Đặc biệt, phần về “true expertise isn’t about having all the answers but about asking better questions” thể hiện mature understanding về nature of knowledge. Việc contrast giữa “superficial knowledge” và “gold standard” của Dr. Lan cho thấy critical thinking ability.
Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)
Examiner có thể hỏi thêm 1-2 câu ngắn sau Part 2 để transition sang Part 3:
Question 1: Do you still keep in touch with this person?
Band 6-7 Answer:
“Yes, I do. We sometimes email each other and I try to attend her public lectures when I have time.”
Band 8-9 Answer:
“Absolutely. We maintain regular contact, primarily through professional channels as we’re still collaborating on a research project. I also make it a point to attend her seminars and workshops whenever my schedule permits, as they’re always intellectually enriching.”
Question 2: Would you like to become as knowledgeable as this person?
Band 6-7 Answer:
“Yes, I would like to be as knowledgeable as her. She is a good example for me to follow and I want to keep learning like she does.”
Band 8-9 Answer:
“That’s certainly an aspiration, though I’m realistic about the decades of dedication it would require to reach her level of expertise. What I find more attainable – and perhaps more important – is emulating her approach to learning: her intellectual curiosity, her interdisciplinary thinking, and especially her humility. I believe these qualities are more valuable than simply amassing knowledge for its own sake.”
IELTS Speaking Part 3: Two-way Discussion
Tổng Quan Về Part 3
Part 3 kéo dài 4-5 phút với các câu hỏi thảo luận sâu và trừu tượng hơn, mở rộng từ chủ đề Part 2. Đây là phần khó nhất vì yêu cầu bạn phải phân tích, so sánh, đánh giá và đưa ra quan điểm có lý lẽ về các vấn đề xã hội, văn hóa, giáo dục liên quan đến kiến thức.
Yêu cầu cụ thể:
- Đưa ra câu trả lời dài 3-5 câu cho mỗi question
- Phân tích nhiều góc độ của vấn đề (không chỉ một chiều)
- Sử dụng examples từ society, không chỉ personal experience
- Thừa nhận complexity của issues (acknowledge both sides)
Chiến lược hiệu quả:
- Sử dụng discourse markers để tạo thinking time (Well, That’s an interesting question, I would say that…)
- Structure câu trả lời: Direct answer → Reason 1 + example → Reason 2 → Concluding thought/nuance
- Demonstrate critical thinking bằng cách xem xét counter-arguments
Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:
- Trả lời quá ngắn, chỉ 1-2 câu không đủ developed
- Không đưa ra reasoning rõ ràng cho opinions
- Thiếu từ vựng abstract và academic để discuss complex topics
- Chỉ nói về personal experience thay vì societal perspectives
Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu
Theme 1: Knowledge and Education
Question 1: What are the most effective ways for people to gain knowledge nowadays?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Compare/Evaluate different methods
- Key words: “most effective ways”, “gain knowledge”, “nowadays” (cần nhấn mạnh modern context)
- Cách tiếp cận: Liệt kê 2-3 methods, so sánh effectiveness, có thể acknowledge rằng effectiveness varies depending on learning style
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I think there are several good ways to gain knowledge today. The Internet is very useful because people can find information quickly and easily. Online courses are also popular now, like on YouTube or Coursera. Traditional methods like reading books are still important too. Different people prefer different ways, so it depends on individual learning style.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Có list ra methods và mention về individual differences
- Vocabulary: Basic terms như “good ways”, “useful”, “popular” chưa precise
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Trả lời đủ câu hỏi với ideas relevant nhưng thiếu depth trong analysis và sophistication trong language
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“Well, I’d say the landscape of knowledge acquisition has been fundamentally transformed in recent years. The most impactful approach, in my view, is leveraging digital platforms that offer structured learning pathways – platforms like Coursera or edX that provide university-level courses taught by leading academics. What makes these particularly effective is the combination of rigor and flexibility they offer. Beyond formal online education, I think interactive communities – whether on Reddit, specialized forums, or professional networks like LinkedIn – have become invaluable because they allow for peer-to-peer learning and real-time knowledge exchange. That said, I’d argue that the most effective approach is actually a blended model that combines digital resources with traditional face-to-face mentorship. While technology democratizes access to information, there’s something irreplaceable about the nuanced guidance and personalized feedback you get from direct interaction with experts.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Well-organized với clear progression: Main answer → Explanation → Additional point → Balanced conclusion acknowledging complexity
- Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (fundamentally transformed, leveraging, structured learning pathways, rigor and flexibility, peer-to-peer learning, democratizes access, nuanced guidance)
- Grammar: Complex structures naturally integrated (relative clauses “that provide…”, “that combines…”, “you get from…”)
- Critical Thinking: Shows balanced view bằng cách acknowledge both benefits của technology và irreplaceable value của human interaction
💡 Key Language Features:
- Discourse markers: “Well”, “in my view”, “Beyond”, “That said”, “While”
- Tentative language: “I’d say”, “I think”, “I’d argue” – thể hiện intellectual humility
- Abstract nouns: “landscape of knowledge acquisition”, “rigor”, “flexibility”, “democratizes access”
- Comparative structures: “the most impactful”, “particularly effective”, “the most effective approach”
Question 2: Why do some people seem to learn things faster than others?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Cause-Effect / Explanation
- Key words: “some people”, “faster than others” (comparative aspect)
- Cách tiếp cận: Explain multiple factors (cognitive, environmental, motivational), avoid oversimplification
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“There are different reasons why some people learn faster. First, some people are naturally smarter or have better memory. Also, their learning environment matters – if they have good teachers or supportive family, they can learn better. Motivation is important too. People who really want to learn something will try harder and learn faster.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Lists several factors systematically
- Ideas: Relevant points about intelligence, environment, motivation
- Vocabulary: Simple expressions “naturally smarter”, “learn better”, “try harder”
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Covers main points adequately nhưng lacks nuance và sophisticated explanation
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“That’s a fascinating question because the answer is multifaceted. On the cognitive level, there are certainly innate differences in things like processing speed, working memory capacity, and what psychologists call ‘cognitive flexibility’ – the ability to shift between different concepts or adapt learning strategies. However, I think it would be overly simplistic to attribute learning speed solely to innate ability. Environmental factors play an equally crucial role – individuals with access to quality education, rich learning resources, and supportive mentorship naturally have a significant advantage. Beyond these structural factors, I’d emphasize the role of metacognitive skills – essentially, ‘learning how to learn.’ People who are adept at things like self-monitoring their understanding, identifying knowledge gaps, and employing effective study strategies tend to acquire new knowledge more efficiently, regardless of their baseline cognitive abilities. There’s also compelling research suggesting that mindset matters tremendously – those who embrace challenges and view intelligence as malleable rather than fixed tend to persist through difficulties and ultimately achieve better learning outcomes.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Sophisticated organization: Cognitive factors → Qualification of nature vs nurture → Environmental factors → Metacognitive dimension → Mindset research
- Vocabulary: Academic và precise (multifaceted, innate differences, cognitive flexibility, overly simplistic, metacognitive skills, adept at, baseline cognitive abilities, malleable)
- Grammar: Complex sentences với embedded clauses, apposition (“metacognitive skills – essentially, ‘learning how to learn'”), relative clauses
- Critical Thinking: Avoids oversimplification, acknowledges multiple perspectives, cites research (“compelling research suggesting”), shows nuanced understanding
💡 Key Language Features:
- Hedging language: “certainly”, “naturally”, “I think it would be”, “I’d emphasize”, “tend to”
- Academic vocabulary: “multifaceted”, “innate”, “attribute…to”, “adept at”, “malleable”
- Signposting: “On the cognitive level”, “However”, “Beyond these structural factors”, “There’s also”
- Explanatory devices: “essentially”, “– the ability to…”, “things like”
Tương tự như describe a person who inspired you to do something interesting, việc miêu tả một người có kiến thức uyên bác đòi hỏi bạn phải làm nổi bật những đặc điểm trí tuệ và ảnh hưởng của người đó lên sự phát triển cá nhân của bạn.
Nhóm sinh viên đa dạng thảo luận và chia sẻ kiến thức trong thư viện đại học hiện đại
Theme 2: Knowledge in Society
Question 1: Do you think society values knowledgeable people enough?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Opinion with evaluation
- Key words: “society”, “values”, “enough” (requires assessment)
- Cách tiếp cận: State opinion → Provide evidence/examples → Acknowledge complexity hoặc counter-perspective
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I think society does value knowledgeable people, but maybe not always in the right way. For example, professors and scientists are respected, but they often don’t earn as much money as businesspeople or celebrities. In my country, teachers are respected but their salaries are quite low. So society says it values knowledge, but sometimes actions don’t match words.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Clear opinion with supporting examples
- Ideas: Good contrast between respect và financial reward
- Vocabulary: Basic expressions “in the right way”, “quite low”, “actions don’t match words”
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Relevant answer with reasonable examples nhưng thiếu sophistication và depth in analysis
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“I’d say it’s a mixed picture that varies considerably across different sectors and cultures. On the one hand, we’re living in what some call the ‘knowledge economy,’ where intellectual capital is supposedly highly prized. We see this reflected in the premium placed on higher education and specialized expertise in fields like technology, medicine, and law. On the other hand, there’s a troubling disconnect between the rhetoric of valuing knowledge and the actual recognition given to knowledge workers in many fields. Take academia, for instance – despite being the custodians of knowledge creation and dissemination, many researchers and educators face precarious employment conditions and salaries that don’t reflect their years of training and societal contribution. What’s more concerning is the rise of anti-intellectualism in some quarters, where expertise is dismissed or scientific consensus is questioned without valid grounds. I think we’re at a critical juncture where society needs to recalibrate how it recognizes and rewards different forms of knowledge contribution, particularly in fields that may not have immediate commercial applications but are vital for long-term societal wellbeing – think environmental science, public health, or education research.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Nuanced answer với balanced view: positive aspects → negative aspects → specific example → broader concern → forward-looking conclusion
- Vocabulary: Sophisticated và topic-specific (knowledge economy, intellectual capital, premium placed on, custodians of knowledge, precarious employment, anti-intellectualism, critical juncture, recalibrate)
- Grammar: Variety of complex structures including apposition, relative clauses, participle phrases, dashes for emphasis
- Critical Thinking: Shows maturity bằng cách acknowledge complexity (“mixed picture”), provide concrete examples, identify societal trends (anti-intellectualism), và propose thoughtful reflection on how society should change
💡 Key Language Features:
- Balanced expressions: “On the one hand… On the other hand”, “mixed picture”
- Academic phrases: “custodians of knowledge”, “intellectual capital”, “critical juncture”
- Emphatic structures: “What’s more concerning”, “Take academia, for instance”
- Future-oriented thinking: “needs to recalibrate”, “vital for long-term societal wellbeing”
Question 2: How has the Internet changed the way people share and access knowledge?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Describe change/Compare past and present
- Key words: “Internet”, “changed”, “share and access” (both directions of knowledge flow)
- Cách tiếp cận: Describe traditional ways → Contrast with current digital methods → Discuss implications (both positive and negative)
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“The Internet has changed knowledge sharing a lot. In the past, people had to go to libraries or buy books to learn things. Now they can just search on Google and find information immediately. People can also share their knowledge easily through blogs, videos, or social media. However, this also means there is a lot of wrong information online, so people need to be careful about what they believe.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Clear comparison past vs present, acknowledges both benefits và drawbacks
- Ideas: Covers main points về accessibility và information quality
- Vocabulary: Basic comparisons “in the past”, “now”, “a lot”
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate response covering key points but lacks depth và sophistication
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“The Internet has fundamentally revolutionized both the democratization and dissemination of knowledge in ways that would have been unimaginable just a few decades ago. Traditionally, knowledge acquisition was mediated through gatekeepers – libraries, educational institutions, publishers – which meant access was often constrained by geography, socioeconomic status, or institutional affiliation. The digital revolution has dismantled many of these barriers. We now have unprecedented access to everything from peer-reviewed academic journals through platforms like Google Scholar to massive open online courses from world-class universities. Perhaps even more transformative is the shift from unidirectional to participatory knowledge creation. Platforms like Wikipedia, Stack Exchange, or even YouTube have enabled ordinary individuals to not just consume but actively contribute to the collective knowledge base. However, this democratization comes with caveats. The proliferation of information has paradoxically made discerning credible knowledge more challenging. We’re grappling with issues of misinformation, echo chambers, and what some scholars call ‘information overload.’ The critical skill in the digital age isn’t just accessing information – that’s trivially easy now – but evaluating its reliability, synthesizing insights from multiple sources, and distinguishing between genuine expertise and superficial knowledge. In many ways, the Internet has shifted the bottleneck from information scarcity to attention scarcity and discernment skills.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Comprehensive answer với clear progression: Traditional barriers → Digital transformation → Positive changes (access) → Positive changes (participation) → Challenges → New skills required → Conceptual reframing
- Vocabulary: Highly sophisticated và precise (fundamentally revolutionized, democratization, dissemination, mediated through gatekeepers, dismantled barriers, unprecedented access, unidirectional to participatory, proliferation, grappling with, discernment)
- Grammar: Complex sentences với multiple embedded clauses, sophisticated nominalization (democratization, dissemination), parallel structures
- Critical Thinking: Demonstrates deep understanding bằng cách not just describe changes but analyze implications, acknowledge paradoxes (“paradoxically made discerning…more challenging”), và reframe the core issue (“shifted the bottleneck”)
💡 Key Language Features:
- Transformative language: “fundamentally revolutionized”, “dismantled barriers”, “perhaps even more transformative”
- Academic hedging: “in many ways”, “some scholars call”
- Cause-effect markers: “which meant”, “has enabled”, “comes with”
- Conceptual framing: “shifted the bottleneck from…to…”, “critical skill”, “distinguishing between”
Khi thảo luận về vai trò của kiến thức trong xã hội, bạn có thể tham khảo thêm cách phân tích về describe a time when you were very successful in your studies để thấy được mối liên hệ giữa việc tiếp thu kiến thức và thành công học tập.
Theme 3: Expertise and Specialization
Question 1: Is it better to know a lot about one subject or a little about many subjects?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Compare and express preference with reasoning
- Key words: “better” (requires evaluation criteria), “a lot about one” vs “a little about many”
- Cách tiếp cận: Present both sides → State nuanced position → Explain context-dependency
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I think both types of knowledge are useful. Specialists who know a lot about one subject are important for solving difficult problems in that area. But people with broad knowledge can connect different ideas and be more creative. In my opinion, it depends on your job and goals. For a doctor or engineer, deep knowledge is more important. For a manager or entrepreneur, broad knowledge might be better.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Presents both sides và acknowledges context-dependency
- Ideas: Reasonable points about depth vs breadth
- Vocabulary: Simple comparisons “useful”, “important”, “better”
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Balanced view với relevant reasoning nhưng lacks sophistication và specific examples
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“This is one of those perennial debates that I think has become even more nuanced in today’s complex world. Traditionally, there’s been this dichotomy between the specialist – someone with deep, vertical knowledge in a narrow domain – and the generalist – someone with broad, horizontal knowledge across multiple fields. Each approach has distinct merits. Specialization allows for true expertise and the deep problem-solving capacity needed to push boundaries in a field. Think of a neurosurgeon or a quantum physicist – these roles demand years of focused, intensive study. However, we’re increasingly recognizing the value of what some call ‘T-shaped individuals’ – people who have depth in one area but sufficient breadth to collaborate effectively across disciplines. Many of today’s most pressing challenges – climate change, public health crises, technological ethics – are inherently interdisciplinary and require people who can bridge different knowledge domains. In my view, the ideal isn’t really a choice between the two but rather cultivating both depth and breadth in a way that’s strategically balanced for one’s goals. Early in one’s career, building solid expertise in a core domain provides credibility and foundation. But simultaneously maintaining intellectual curiosity across fields can spark innovation – some of the greatest breakthroughs have come from applying concepts from one field to solve problems in another. So I’d argue the question shouldn’t be ‘either/or’ but rather ‘how to strategically develop both’ in a way that maximizes one’s ability to contribute meaningfully to their field while remaining adaptable in a rapidly changing knowledge landscape.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Highly sophisticated với clear progression: Introduce debate → Present specialist side → Present generalist side → Introduce synthesis concept (T-shaped) → State nuanced personal view → Explain strategic approach → Reframe the question
- Vocabulary: Exceptional range và precision (perennial debates, dichotomy, vertical/horizontal knowledge, T-shaped individuals, inherently interdisciplinary, bridge different knowledge domains, strategically balanced, spark innovation, rapidly changing knowledge landscape)
- Grammar: Complex structures seamlessly integrated including relative clauses, participle phrases, dashes for explanation, conditional implications
- Critical Thinking: Demonstrates highest level thinking bằng cách transcend binary choice, introduce sophisticated concept (T-shaped individuals), acknowledge complexity của modern challenges, propose integrated approach, và reframe question entirely
💡 Key Language Features:
- Sophisticated opening: “This is one of those perennial debates”
- Academic framing: “dichotomy between”, “Each approach has distinct merits”, “inherently interdisciplinary”
- Synthesis language: “rather than”, “simultaneously”, “how to strategically develop both”
- Metaphorical language: “T-shaped individuals”, “vertical/horizontal knowledge”, “bridge different domains”
- Conditional reasoning: “Early in one’s career…But simultaneously…”
Question 2: Should companies invest more in training knowledgeable employees or hiring new experts?
🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:
- Dạng: Opinion về business strategy với comparison
- Key words: “invest more”, “training” vs “hiring”, “should”
- Cách tiếp cận: Analyze benefits của mỗi approach → Consider trade-offs → Suggest balanced or context-dependent approach
📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:
“I think companies should do both, but training current employees might be more important. When you train existing employees, they already know the company culture and processes, so they can use new knowledge more effectively. Also, it shows that the company cares about employees’ development, which improves loyalty. However, sometimes companies need specific expertise that takes too long to develop internally, so hiring experts is necessary. The best approach depends on the situation and what the company needs.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: States preference → Provides reasons → Acknowledges alternative → Concludes with context-dependency
- Ideas: Relevant points về company culture, loyalty, và time constraints
- Vocabulary: Adequate business vocabulary nhưng fairly basic
- Tại sao Band 6-7: Sensible business reasoning với balanced view nhưng lacks sophistication và depth
📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:
“This question touches on a fundamental strategic dilemma in human resource management, and I think the answer is considerably more nuanced than a simple either/or choice. From a purely economic standpoint, investing in existing employees often yields better long-term returns. There’s what economists call the ‘institutional knowledge premium’ – employees who’ve been with an organization understand the unwritten rules, the organizational culture, and the informal networks that make things actually work, beyond what’s in the official handbook. Upskilling these individuals not only enhances their capabilities but also strengthens retention, which is crucial given that the cost of employee turnover – including recruitment, onboarding, and lost productivity – can reach up to 200% of an annual salary for specialized positions. However, there are compelling scenarios where external hiring becomes imperative. When an organization is undergoing transformation or venturing into entirely new domains, bringing in outside expertise can inject fresh perspectives and challenge entrenched thinking that might stifle innovation. There’s also the reality that certain cutting-edge specializations – say, artificial intelligence or blockchain technologies – may not have enough internal talent to train up from within a reasonable timeframe. In my view, the most strategically sound approach is what’s called a ’70-20-10 model’ – allocating roughly 70% of development investment to training and upskilling existing talent, 20% to strategic external hiring for critical skill gaps, and 10% to experimental recruitment of diverse perspectives that can catalyze innovation. This balanced portfolio approach allows organizations to leverage the institutional knowledge of existing staff while systematically infusing new expertise and perspectives. Ultimately, the optimal balance will hinge on the organization’s strategic priorities, industry dynamics, and current talent composition, but completely neglecting either approach would be strategically short-sighted.”
Phân tích:
- Structure: Exceptionally well-organized với sophisticated flow: Frame the dilemma → Present case for training (with economic reasoning) → Present case for hiring (with specific scenarios) → Propose sophisticated synthesis (70-20-10 model) → Acknowledge context-dependency → Strong conclusion
- Vocabulary: Business-specific và highly sophisticated (fundamental strategic dilemma, yields better long-term returns, institutional knowledge premium, upskilling, cost of employee turnover, undergoing transformation, inject fresh perspectives, entrenched thinking, cutting-edge specializations, strategic external hiring, catalyze innovation, balanced portfolio approach, systematically infusing, strategic priorities, strategically short-sighted)
- Grammar: Complex business language với nominalization, passive constructions, conditional logic, relative clauses
- Critical Thinking: Demonstrates executive-level thinking bằng cách use economic concepts, cite specific data (200% of salary), introduce sophisticated framework (70-20-10 model), analyze trade-offs comprehensively, acknowledge multiple variables
💡 Key Language Features:
- Business framing: “touches on a fundamental strategic dilemma”, “from a purely economic standpoint”, “strategically sound approach”
- Economic concepts: “yields better long-term returns”, “institutional knowledge premium”, “cost of employee turnover”
- Strategic vocabulary: “imperative”, “transformational”, “strategic priorities”, “optimal balance”, “hinge on”
- Balanced analysis markers: “However”, “There’s also the reality”, “In my view”, “Ultimately”
- Sophisticated models: “70-20-10 model”, “balanced portfolio approach”
Để hiểu sâu hơn về vai trò của kiến thức trong môi trường học tập, bạn nên tham khảo describe a lesson that you remember vividly from school vì nó cho thấy cách một bài học được giảng dạy bởi người có kiến thức có thể để lại ấn tượng sâu sắc.
Từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng
Topic-Specific Vocabulary
| Từ vựng/Cụm từ | Loại từ | Phiên âm | Nghĩa tiếng Việt | Ví dụ | Collocation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| knowledgeable | adj | /ˈnɒlɪdʒəbl/ | có kiến thức rộng, hiểu biết nhiều | She’s extremely knowledgeable about ancient history. | highly knowledgeable, remarkably knowledgeable, exceptionally knowledgeable |
| erudite | adj | /ˈeruːdaɪt/ | uyên bác, thông thái | The professor is an erudite scholar in classical literature. | erudite scholar, erudite discussion, erudite commentary |
| expertise | n | /ˌekspɜːˈtiːz/ | chuyên môn, kiến thức chuyên sâu | His expertise in cybersecurity is internationally recognized. | develop expertise, demonstrate expertise, area of expertise, technical expertise |
| well-versed in | phrase | /wel vɜːst ɪn/ | am hiểu, thông thạo về | She’s well-versed in multiple programming languages. | well-versed in theory, well-versed in practice, thoroughly well-versed |
| intellectual prowess | n | /ˌɪntəˈlektʃuəl praʊəs/ | năng lực trí tuệ xuất chúng | His intellectual prowess was evident from his publications. | demonstrate intellectual prowess, impressive intellectual prowess |
| breadth of knowledge | phrase | /bredθ əv ˈnɒlɪdʒ/ | sự rộng lớn của kiến thức | The breadth of her knowledge spans multiple disciplines. | remarkable breadth of knowledge, extraordinary breadth |
| depth of understanding | phrase | /depθ əv ˌʌndəˈstændɪŋ/ | sự hiểu biết sâu sắc | His depth of understanding in economics is impressive. | profound depth of understanding, demonstrate depth |
| specialized knowledge | n | /ˈspeʃəlaɪzd ˈnɒlɪdʒ/ | kiến thức chuyên môn | The job requires specialized knowledge in biotechnology. | possess specialized knowledge, require specialized knowledge |
| proficiency | n | /prəˈfɪʃənsi/ | sự thành thạo, trình độ cao | She has achieved proficiency in five languages. | demonstrate proficiency, language proficiency, high level of proficiency |
| cognitive abilities | n | /ˈkɒɡnɪtɪv əˈbɪlətiz/ | khả năng nhận thức | Strong cognitive abilities help in problem-solving. | superior cognitive abilities, develop cognitive abilities, enhance cognitive abilities |
| intellectual curiosity | n | /ˌɪntəˈlektʃuəl ˌkjʊəriˈɒsəti/ | sự tò mò trí tuệ | Her intellectual curiosity drives her constant learning. | insatiable intellectual curiosity, foster intellectual curiosity |
| academic credentials | n | /ˌækəˈdemɪk krɪˈdenʃlz/ | bằng cấp học thuật | His academic credentials include a PhD from Oxford. | impressive academic credentials, solid academic credentials |
| profound knowledge | phrase | /prəˈfaʊnd ˈnɒlɪdʒ/ | kiến thức sâu rộng | She has profound knowledge of marine biology. | possess profound knowledge, demonstrate profound knowledge |
| mastery | n | /ˈmɑːstəri/ | sự thông thạo tuyệt đối | His mastery of the subject is undeniable. | achieve mastery, demonstrate mastery, complete mastery |
| insightful | adj | /ˈɪnsaɪtfʊl/ | có nhận thức sâu sắc | Her analysis was remarkably insightful. | highly insightful, particularly insightful, insightful observations |
| encyclopedic knowledge | phrase | /ɪnˌsaɪkləˈpiːdɪk ˈnɒlɪdʒ/ | kiến thức bách khoa, uyên bác | He has encyclopedic knowledge of world history. | possess encyclopedic knowledge, near-encyclopedic knowledge |
| subject matter expert | n | /ˈsʌbdʒɪkt ˈmætə ˈekspɜːt/ | chuyên gia về một lĩnh vực | She’s a subject matter expert in data privacy law. | recognized subject matter expert, consult subject matter expert |
| cross-disciplinary | adj | /krɒs ˈdɪsəplɪnəri/ | liên ngành, đa ngành | His research takes a cross-disciplinary approach. | cross-disciplinary knowledge, cross-disciplinary research |
| command of | phrase | /kəˈmɑːnd əv/ | sự nắm vững, thành thạo | She has an excellent command of technical terminology. | strong command of, impressive command of, command of the subject |
| enlightening | adj | /ɪnˈlaɪtnɪŋ/ | khai sáng, mở mang trí tuệ | His lectures are always enlightening. | highly enlightening, particularly enlightening, enlightening experience |
Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases
| Cụm từ | Nghĩa | Ví dụ sử dụng | Band điểm |
|---|---|---|---|
| a walking encyclopedia | người như bộ bách khoa toàn thư sống | My professor is a walking encyclopedia of ancient civilizations. | 7.5-9 |
| know something inside out | hiểu biết cặn kẽ, tường tận | He knows the software inside out after years of development. | 7-8 |
| be on top of something | nắm bắt tốt, cập nhật về cái gì | She’s always on top of the latest research in her field. | 7-8 |
| have something at one’s fingertips | có thông tin sẵn, nhớ rất rõ | He has all the historical dates at his fingertips. | 7.5-8.5 |
| soak up knowledge like a sponge | hấp thụ kiến thức như bọt biển | Young children soak up languages like a sponge. | 7-8 |
| a fountain of knowledge | nguồn kiến thức phong phú | Our guide was a fountain of knowledge about local history. | 7.5-8.5 |
| well-read | có học thức, đọc nhiều sách | She’s incredibly well-read in classical literature. | 7-8 |
| scholarly pursuits | hoạt động học thuật, nghiên cứu | He dedicated his life to scholarly pursuits. | 8-9 |
| intellectual rigor | sự chặt chẽ về mặt trí tuệ | The research demonstrates impressive intellectual rigor. | 8-9 |
| push the boundaries of knowledge | mở rộng ranh giới kiến thức | Scientists constantly push the boundaries of knowledge. | 8-9 |
| cultivate expertise | hun đúc chuyên môn | It takes years to cultivate expertise in any field. | 7.5-8.5 |
| intellectual capacity | năng lực trí tuệ | Her intellectual capacity is truly remarkable. | 7.5-8.5 |
Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)
Để bắt đầu câu trả lời:
- 📝 Well,… – Sử dụng khi cần một chút thời gian suy nghĩ: “Well, I’d have to say that knowledge comes in many forms.”
- 📝 Actually,… – Khi đưa ra góc nhìn khác hoặc correct một assumption: “Actually, I think expertise develops gradually over time.”
- 📝 To be honest,… – Khi nói thật về cảm nhận cá nhân: “To be honest, I find knowledgeable people quite inspiring.”
- 📝 I’d say that… – Cách lịch sự đưa ra quan điểm: “I’d say that continuous learning is essential.”
- 📝 From my perspective,… – Thể hiện personal viewpoint: “From my perspective, knowledge without wisdom is incomplete.”
Để bổ sung ý:
- 📝 On top of that,… – Thêm vào đó: “On top of that, she has excellent communication skills.”
- 📝 What’s more,… – Hơn nữa: “What’s more, his knowledge extends beyond his specialty.”
- 📝 Not to mention… – Chưa kể đến: “Not to mention his ability to explain complex concepts simply.”
- 📝 Beyond that,… – Ngoài ra: “Beyond that, he’s always willing to share his expertise.”
- 📝 Additionally,… – Thêm vào đó (formal hơn): “Additionally, she publishes regularly in academic journals.”
Để đưa ra quan điểm cân bằng:
- 📝 On the one hand,… On the other hand,… – Một mặt…mặt khác: “On the one hand, specialists have deep knowledge. On the other hand, generalists see connections across fields.”
- 📝 While it’s true that…, we also need to consider… – “While it’s true that books are important, we also need to consider practical experience.”
- 📝 That said,… – Tuy nhiên, điều đó nói lên rằng: “That said, not everyone has equal access to education.”
- 📝 Having said that,… – Sau khi nói điều đó: “Having said that, expertise alone doesn’t guarantee success.”
Để kết luận:
- 📝 All in all,… – Tóm lại: “All in all, I believe society should value knowledge more.”
- 📝 At the end of the day,… – Cuối cùng thì: “At the end of the day, practical knowledge matters most.”
- 📝 Ultimately,… – Cuối cùng, về cơ bản: “Ultimately, continuous learning is what keeps knowledge relevant.”
- 📝 In the final analysis,… – Xét cho cùng: “In the final analysis, wisdom is more valuable than mere facts.”
Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng
1. Conditional Sentences (Câu điều kiện):
-
Mixed conditional: Kết hợp quá khứ và hiện tại để thể hiện consequence của past action lên present situation
- Formula: If + Past Perfect, … would/could + Verb (present)
- Ví dụ: “If she hadn’t pursued her doctorate, she wouldn’t be the leading expert she is today.”
-
Inversion: Đảo ngữ trong câu điều kiện tạo formal tone
- Formula: Had/Were/Should + Subject + Verb…
- Ví dụ: “Had I known about his expertise earlier, I would have consulted him sooner.”
- Ví dụ: “Were it not for his extensive knowledge, the project would have failed.”
2. Relative Clauses (Mệnh đề quan hệ):
- Non-defining relative clauses: Cung cấp extra information, được ngăn cách bằng dấu phẩy
- Formula: …, which/who/whose + clause, …
- Ví dụ: “Dr. Nguyen, who has published over 50 research papers, is highly respected in her field.”
- Ví dụ: “His book, which took five years to complete, became a seminal work.”
3. Passive Voice (Câu bị động):
-
Impersonal passive để express general beliefs:
- It is thought/believed/said that…
- Ví dụ: “It is widely believed that expertise requires at least 10,000 hours of practice.”
- Ví dụ: “It is generally acknowledged that she is one of the foremost authorities on climate change.”
-
Passive với modal verbs:
- Ví dụ: “True expertise can only be developed through years of dedicated study.”
4. Cleft Sentences (Câu chẻ):
-
What I find most…, is… – Nhấn mạnh điểm quan trọng
- Ví dụ: “What I find most impressive about him is his ability to explain complex theories in simple terms.”
-
The thing that…, is… – Tương tự, nhấn mạnh một aspect
- Ví dụ: “The thing that sets her apart is her interdisciplinary approach to research.”
-
It is…that… – Cleft sentence để emphasize
- Ví dụ: “It is his humility that makes him such an effective teacher, not just his knowledge.”
5. Participle Phrases:
-
Present participle (-ing) phrases:
- Ví dụ: “Having spent decades studying the subject, she can discuss it from multiple perspectives.”
- Ví dụ: “Knowing that information is constantly evolving, he reads new research daily.”
-
Past participle (-ed) phrases:
- Ví dụ: “Equipped with extensive knowledge, she tackles problems methodically.”
6. Nominalization (Danh từ hóa):
Chuyển động từ/tính từ thành danh từ để tạo academic style:
- “acquire knowledge” → “knowledge acquisition”
- “disseminate information” → “information dissemination”
- Ví dụ: “The democratization of knowledge through the Internet has transformed education.”
7. Emphatic Structures:
-
Not only…but also…
- Ví dụ: “He is not only knowledgeable about physics but also has deep insights into philosophy.”
-
What’s more/Furthermore positioned initially:
- Ví dụ: “She has a PhD from Cambridge. What’s more, she’s won multiple international awards.”
Những người có kiến thức uyên bác thường có khả năng truyền cảm hứng mạnh mẽ, điều này được thể hiện rõ trong describe a museum you would like to visit nơi kiến thức được lưu giữ và chia sẻ cho thế hệ sau.
Chiến Lược Trả Lời Hiệu Quả
Chuẩn Bị Trước Khi Thi
1. Chọn người phù hợp để miêu tả:
- Chọn người bạn thực sự biết rõ, có thể kể chi tiết cụ thể
- Nên là người có lĩnh vực expertise rõ ràng (không chung chung là “biết nhiều thứ”)
- Tốt nhất là người có impact lên cuộc sống của bạn (dễ develop phần “explain feelings”)
- Có thể là: giáo viên/giảng viên, mentor, chuyên gia trong công ty, người thân có chuyên môn cao, hoặc người nổi tiếng bạn nghiên cứu kỹ
2. Brainstorm trước các góc độ:
- Breadth vs Depth: Người đó có kiến thức rộng hay sâu? Cả hai?
- Fields of expertise: List cụ thể các lĩnh vực (ít nhất 2-3)
- How they demonstrate knowledge: Qua giảng dạy? Nghiên cứu? Publications? Giải quyết vấn đề thực tế?
- Impact on you: Học được gì? Thay đổi perspective như thế nào?
3. Chuẩn bị vocabulary clusters:
Thay vì học từ lẻ, học theo cụm:
- “demonstrates profound expertise in [field]”
- “possesses an encyclopedic knowledge of [subject]”
- “has an impressive command of [topic]”
- “is remarkably well-versed in [area]”
Trong Phòng Thi
Part 1 – Chiến thuật:
-
Mở rộng câu trả lời: Không chỉ trả lời Yes/No. Structure: Direct answer + Reason + Example
- Weak: “Yes, I like learning.”
- Strong: “Absolutely! I’m passionate about learning because it keeps my mind active. Just recently, I’ve been studying data analytics through online courses.”
-
Tránh repetition: Nếu examiner hỏi nhiều câu về learning/knowledge, vary vocabulary
- Thay vì lặp “learn”: acquire knowledge, pick up skills, develop expertise, expand understanding
- Thay vì lặp “know”: be familiar with, be well-versed in, have a good grasp of
Part 2 – Chiến thuật:
Trong 1 phút chuẩn bị:
- Đừng viết câu, chỉ ghi keywords cho mỗi bullet point
- Ví dụ note-taking hiệu quả:
Who: Prof. Minh - enviro science - VNU How know: freshman year - ecology course - 2018 What knows: - biodiversity, sustainability - + economics, politics - can explain complex → simple Feelings: - admire curiosity - influenced my approach - think of him when challenges
Khi nói:
-
Timing strategy:
- Who + How know: 30-40 giây
- What knows: 50-60 giây (phần này cần detail nhất)
- Explain feelings: 40-50 giây
-
Signposting: Giúp examiner follow structure
- “I’d like to talk about…”
- “Regarding how I know him…”
- “In terms of his knowledge…”
- “What I particularly appreciate is…”
-
Buy time techniques khi cần nghĩ:
- “Let me think… Yes, what really stands out is…”
- “How should I put it… I’d say that…”
- Paraphrase lại câu hỏi: “In terms of what he knows about…”
Part 3 – Chiến thuật:
Structure câu trả lời Part 3:
- Direct answer (1 câu): State your position clearly
- Reason 1 + elaboration/example (2-3 câu)
- Reason 2 / Alternative perspective (2 câu)
- Conclusion / Nuance (1 câu): Acknowledge complexity hoặc restate position
Ví dụ structure:
Q: Why do some people learn faster?
1. "The answer is multifaceted."
2. "Cognitively, there are innate differences in processing speed and memory capacity..."
3. "However, environmental factors play an equally important role..."
4. "Ultimately, it's likely a complex interaction between nature and nurture."Xử lý câu hỏi khó:
-
Nếu không hiểu câu hỏi:
- “I’m sorry, could you rephrase that?”
- “Just to clarify, are you asking about…?”
-
Nếu không có ý kiến ngay:
- “That’s an interesting question. Let me think…”
- “Well, I haven’t really thought about it before, but I’d say…”
-
Nếu không biết answer chính xác:
- “I’m not entirely sure, but from what I understand…”
- “That’s not really my area of expertise, but I imagine…”
Lỗi Thường Gặp Cần Tránh
1. Lỗi nội dung:
- ❌ Miêu tả người quá chung chung, không có chi tiết cụ thể về lĩnh vực expertise
- ❌ Bỏ sót bullet points trong Part 2
- ❌ Phần “explain” quá ngắn – đây là phần quan trọng nhất!
- ❌ Không đưa ra examples trong Part 3
2. Lỗi ngôn ngữ:
- ❌ Over-use “very”: “very knowledgeable” → “exceptionally knowledgeable”
- ❌ Repetitive vocabulary: Lặp “good”, “important”, “know” quá nhiều
- ❌ Simple sentences liên tục: Cần mix với complex structures
- ❌ Pronunciation errors với academic words: Practice saying “erudite” /ˈeruːdaɪt/, “expertise” /ˌekspɜːˈtiːz/
3. Lỗi delivery:
- ❌ Nói quá nhanh vì nervous → Breathe, pace yourself
- ❌ Không maintain eye contact với examiner
- ❌ Monotone voice → Vary intonation để show enthusiasm
- ❌ Stopping giữa Part 2 trước khi đủ 2 phút
Lộ Trình Luyện Tập
Tuần 1-2: Building Foundation
- Học thuộc 20-30 từ vựng core về knowledge và expertise
- Practice Part 1 questions với timing (aim for 3-4 câu trong 20-30 giây)
- Brainstorm 3-4 người khác nhau bạn có thể miêu tả
Tuần 3-4: Part 2 Mastery
- Record yourself doing Part 2 với timing chính xác
- Listen back và identify: vocabulary range, grammar structures, hesitations
- Rewrite và improve, sau đó practice version 2
- Aim: Comfortable nói 2 phút+ về 2-3 người khác nhau
Tuần 5-6: Part 3 Depth
- Practice Part 3 questions với focus on developing complex answers
- Study sample band 8-9 answers để internalize structures
- Practice expressing nuanced opinions và balanced views
- Record và analyze: Are you providing enough elaboration?
Tuần 7-8: Mock Tests
- Full mock tests với timing như thật
- Record và self-assess theo band descriptors
- Identify patterns trong errors
- Focus improvement vào weakest area
Khi bạn phát triển khả năng miêu tả một người có kiến thức uyên bác, điều này cũng giúp bạn trả lời tốt hơn các chủ đề liên quan như describe a time when you led a team project vì người có kiến thức thường là những leader hiệu quả.
Kết Luận
Chủ đề “Describe a person who is very knowledgeable” là một trong những đề tài phổ biến và có giá trị trong IELTS Speaking. Thành công với chủ đề này không chỉ đơn thuần là việc miêu tả một người thông minh, mà còn thể hiện được khả năng sử dụng từ vựng sophisticated về trí tuệ, chuyên môn, và education, đồng thời demonstrate understanding sâu sắc về nature of knowledge trong xã hội hiện đại.
Những điểm quan trọng cần nhớ:
Về nội dung:
- Chọn một người cụ thể mà bạn có thể miêu tả chi tiết với genuine examples
- Phát triển đầy đủ phần “explain feelings” vì đây là nơi ghi điểm cao nhất
- Trong Part 3, demonstrate critical thinking bằng cách acknowledge complexity của issues
- Avoid generalization – always provide specific examples và concrete details
Về ngôn ngữ:
- Invest time học vocabulary clusters, không chỉ từ đơn lẻ
- Practice complex grammatical structures cho đến khi chúng trở nên natural
- Vary expressions – có ít nhất 3-4 cách nói về “having knowledge”
- Use discourse markers hiệu quả để tạo cohesion và buy thinking time
Về chiến lược:
- Time management là critical – practice với timer
- Structure câu trả lời rõ ràng, đặc biệt Part 3
- Balance giữa fluency và accuracy – đừng sacrifice communication vì quá focus vào grammar
- Stay calm và authentic – examiner đánh giá communication ability, không phải perfection
Về mindset:
- Xem IELTS Speaking như một conversation, không phải interrogation
- Enthusiasm và genuine interest trong topic sẽ tự nhiên improve delivery
- Mistakes are normal – don’t let them derail your entire performance
- Continuous learning mindset: Mỗi practice session là opportunity để improve
Việc master chủ đề này không chỉ giúp bạn score cao trong IELTS mà còn develop được skills để articulate ideas về education, expertise, và lifelong learning – những topics relevant trong academic và professional contexts. Remember, the goal isn’t just to pass the test nhưng là to become a more confident và effective communicator trong tiếng Anh.
Với sự chuẩn bị kỹ lưỡng theo hướng dẫn trong bài viết này, sử dụng sample answers như reference points (không học thuộc!), và practice đều đặn với focus on improvement areas, bạn hoàn toàn có thể đạt được band điểm mục tiêu của mình. Chúc bạn thành công trong kỳ thi IELTS Speaking!
