IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời Chủ Đề Describe a Person Who Is Very Knowledgeable – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

Chủ đề mô tả một người có kiến thức chuyên sâu trong lĩnh vực của họ là một trong những đề tài phổ biến và quan trọng trong IELTS Speaking. Đây là dạng câu hỏi “Describe a person” xuất hiện thường xuyên trong Part 2, đồng thời các câu hỏi liên quan đến kiến thức, chuyên gia, học tập và phát triển kỹ năng cũng rất phổ biến ở cả Part 1 và Part 3.

Theo thống kê từ các đề thi thực tế, chủ đề này xuất hiện với tần suất cao trong các kỳ thi IELTS từ năm 2020 đến 2024, đặc biệt là ở khu vực Châu Á. Khả năng xuất hiện trong tương lai được đánh giá ở mức Cao, vì nó cho phép thí sinh thể hiện vốn từ vựng về giáo dục, nghề nghiệp, và phẩm chất cá nhân – những chủ đề luôn được IELTS ưu tiên.

Qua bài viết này, bạn sẽ học được câu hỏi thường gặp trong cả 3 Part về chủ đề người có kiến thức chuyên môn cao, bài mẫu chi tiết theo nhiều band điểm từ 6.0 đến 9.0 với phân tích sâu về lý do đạt từng band điểm, từ vựng và cụm từ ăn điểm theo chuẩn examiner, chiến lược trả lời hiệu quả cho từng dạng câu hỏi, cùng những lời khuyên thực tế từ góc nhìn của một giám khảo IELTS với hơn 20 năm kinh nghiệm chấm thi.

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, công việc và môi trường xung quanh thí sinh. Đây là phần khởi động giúp bạn làm quen với examiner và tạo ấn tượng ban đầu.

Chiến lược quan trọng nhất cho Part 1 là trả lời tự nhiên, mở rộng câu trả lời đến 2-3 câu, và tránh câu trả lời một từ. Mỗi câu trả lời nên bao gồm: câu trả lời trực tiếp, lý do hoặc giải thích, và một ví dụ cụ thể nếu có thể.

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam trong Part 1 bao gồm trả lời quá ngắn chỉ Yes hoặc No mà không mở rộng, dùng từ vựng quá đơn giản ở mức tiểu học, thiếu ví dụ cụ thể từ kinh nghiệm bản thân, và nói quá nhanh hoặc quá chậm do căng thẳng.

Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp

Question 1: Do you like learning new things?

Question 2: What subjects are you most interested in?

Question 3: Do you prefer learning from books or from people?

Question 4: Is there anyone in your family who is particularly knowledgeable about something?

Question 5: Do you think it’s important to have expertise in a specific area?

Question 6: What do you do when you want to learn something new?

Question 7: Do you prefer learning alone or with others?

Question 8: Who do you usually ask for advice when you need help?

Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết

Question: Do you like learning new things?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Trả lời trực tiếp Yes/No
• Đưa ra lý do tại sao thích hoặc không thích
• Thêm ví dụ cụ thể về điều gì bạn đã học gần đây

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I do. I think learning new things keeps my mind active and helps me in my career. Recently, I’ve been learning about digital marketing through online courses.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Trả lời rõ ràng, có lý do cơ bản và ví dụ cụ thể
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng còn đơn giản (keeps my mind active), cấu trúc câu đơn giản, thiếu chi tiết về trải nghiệm học tập
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Đáp ứng được yêu cầu cơ bản với Fluency ổn định, Vocabulary adequate nhưng chưa sophisticated, Grammar đúng nhưng đơn giản

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Absolutely, I’m quite passionate about acquiring new knowledge and skills. I find that continuous learning not only keeps me intellectually stimulated but also broadens my perspectives on various aspects of life. Just recently, I’ve been delving into data analytics, which has proven to be both challenging and rewarding, especially since it’s applicable to my current role in project management.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Sử dụng từ vựng tinh vi (passionate about, intellectually stimulated, delving into), cấu trúc phức tạp với mệnh đề quan hệ, ý tưởng sâu sắc về lợi ích của học tập, kết nối với thực tế công việc
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency tự nhiên với discourse markers (Absolutely), Vocabulary precise và idiomatic, Grammar đa dạng với complex structures, ý tưởng được phát triển đầy đủ

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• passionate about: say mê, đam mê điều gì
• continuous learning: học tập liên tục, không ngừng
• keeps me intellectually stimulated: giữ cho tôi luôn được kích thích về mặt trí tuệ
• broaden my perspectives: mở rộng quan điểm, góc nhìn của tôi
• delving into: đào sâu vào, nghiên cứu kỹ về
• challenging and rewarding: đầy thách thức và bổ ích

---

Question: Do you prefer learning from books or from people?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Lựa chọn một phương án hoặc cân bằng cả hai
• Giải thích tại sao bạn thích phương pháp đó
• Đưa ra ví dụ về tình huống học tập cụ thể

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I prefer learning from people because I can ask questions immediately if I don’t understand something. Books are good too, but sometimes they’re difficult to understand without someone to explain.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có sự so sánh giữa hai phương pháp, lý do rõ ràng
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng lặp lại (understand), ý tưởng chưa được phát triển sâu, thiếu ví dụ cụ thể
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Đáp ứng yêu cầu nhưng còn đơn giản, chưa thể hiện được khả năng sử dụng ngôn ngữ linh hoạt

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Well, I’d say it depends on the subject matter, but I generally lean towards learning from people, particularly experts in their field. There’s something incredibly valuable about face-to-face interaction – you can pick up on nuances and ask for clarification on the spot. That said, I do complement this with reading because books provide in-depth theoretical knowledge that conversations might not cover. For instance, when I was learning photography, I attended workshops with professional photographers but also referenced technical manuals to grasp the fundamentals.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Thể hiện sự cân bằng và linh hoạt trong tư duy, sử dụng các cụm từ nâng cao (lean towards, pick up on nuances, complement this with), cấu trúc câu phức tạp với mệnh đề quan hệ, có ví dụ cụ thể và thuyết phục
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency xuất sắc với natural discourse markers, Vocabulary sophisticated và precise, Grammar range rộng, Critical thinking rõ ràng qua việc cân nhắc cả hai phương pháp

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• depends on the subject matter: tùy thuộc vào chủ đề, nội dung
• lean towards: thiên về, có xu hướng chọn
• experts in their field: chuyên gia trong lĩnh vực của họ
• pick up on nuances: nắm bắt được những sắc thái, chi tiết tinh tế
• complement this with: bổ sung điều này bằng
• in-depth theoretical knowledge: kiến thức lý thuyết chuyên sâu
• grasp the fundamentals: nắm bắt những điều cơ bản

---

Question: Is there anyone in your family who is particularly knowledgeable about something?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Giới thiệu người đó và lĩnh vực chuyên môn
• Giải thích tại sao họ có kiến thức sâu
• Kể ngắn gọn về ảnh hưởng của họ đến bạn

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, my father knows a lot about history. He reads many history books and often tells me interesting stories about the past. I think he’s very knowledgeable because he has been interested in this subject since he was young.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có câu trả lời trực tiếp, đưa ra ví dụ về hành vi thể hiện kiến thức
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng cơ bản (knows a lot, interesting stories), thiếu chi tiết về loại lịch sử hoặc tác động cụ thể
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate response nhưng lacks sophistication và depth

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Absolutely, my uncle is remarkably well-versed in traditional Vietnamese medicine and herbal remedies. He’s been practicing as a herbalist for over three decades and has accumulated an impressive wealth of knowledge through both formal training and hands-on experience. What sets him apart is his ability to diagnose ailments simply by examining symptoms and prescribing natural treatments that are often more effective than conventional medicine. Growing up, I was fascinated by his expertise, and he actually sparked my interest in understanding how traditional knowledge can complement modern healthcare.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Mô tả cực kỳ chi tiết và cụ thể về chuyên môn, sử dụng vocabulary chuyên ngành (herbalist, diagnose ailments, herbal remedies), thể hiện personal connection và impact, cấu trúc câu đa dạng với relative clauses và participle phrases
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Exceptional fluency với natural expression, Sophisticated và precise vocabulary, Complex grammar structures, Deep personal insight và meaningful content

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• remarkably well-versed in: rất am hiểu, thông thạo về
• accumulated an impressive wealth of knowledge: tích lũy một lượng kiến thức đáng kể
• sets him apart: làm cho ông ấy khác biệt, nổi bật
• diagnose ailments: chẩn đoán bệnh tật
• sparked my interest in: khơi dậy sự quan tâm của tôi về
• complement modern healthcare: bổ sung cho y học hiện đại

Học viên IELTS Speaking đang luyện tập trả lời câu hỏi về người có kiến thức chuyên môn với giáo viên

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 để chuẩn bị và ghi chú. Đây là phần quan trọng nhất để thể hiện khả năng nói liên tục và tổ chức ý tưởng của bạn.

Chiến lược hiệu quả bao gồm sử dụng hết 1 phút để ghi chú các từ khóa chính, không viết câu hoàn chỉnh, nói đủ 2 phút hoặc tối thiểu 1 phút 45 giây, trả lời đầy đủ tất cả các bullet points theo thứ tự, và sử dụng thì quá khứ khi kể về trải nghiệm đã xảy ra.

Lỗi thường gặp của thí sinh Việt Nam là không tận dụng hết thời gian chuẩn bị để suy nghĩ kỹ, nói dưới 1 phút 30 giây khiến examiner phải hỏi thêm, bỏ sót một hoặc nhiều bullet points, và không biết cách mở rộng ý cho phần explain cuối cùng – đây chính là phần ghi điểm cao nhất.

Cue Card

Describe A Person Who Is Very Knowledgeable In Their Area Of Expertise

You should say:

• Who this person is
• What their area of expertise is
• How you know this person
• And explain why you think they are very knowledgeable

Phân Tích Đề Bài

Dạng câu hỏi: Describe a person – mô tả về một người cụ thể

Thì động từ: Chủ yếu là hiện tại đơn và hiện tại hoàn thành khi nói về chuyên môn và kiến thức hiện tại của người đó, có thể dùng quá khứ đơn khi kể về cách bạn gặp họ

Bullet points phải cover:

• Who: Giới thiệu người đó là ai (tên, tuổi, nghề nghiệp, mối quan hệ với bạn)
• What: Lĩnh vực chuyên môn cụ thể là gì (càng chi tiết càng tốt)
• How: Bạn biết họ qua con đường nào (quen biết như thế nào, từ bao giờ)
• Why: Giải thích tại sao bạn cho rằng họ có kiến thức sâu (bằng chứng cụ thể, thành tựu, ảnh hưởng)

Câu “explain” quan trọng: Đây là phần chiếm 40-50% thời gian nói và là nơi bạn thể hiện critical thinking. Bạn cần đưa ra nhiều lý do với examples cụ thể, không chỉ nói chung chung “because they know a lot”.

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7

Thời lượng: Khoảng 1 phút 45 giây

I’d like to talk about my former English teacher, Ms. Hoa, who is very knowledgeable in English literature and teaching methods.

Ms. Hoa has been teaching English for about 15 years at my high school. Her main area of expertise is English literature, especially British and American novels from the 19th and 20th centuries. She also knows a lot about different teaching techniques and how to make lessons interesting for students.

I met her when I was in grade 10. She was my English teacher for three years until I graduated. During that time, I learned a lot from her, not just about English grammar and vocabulary, but also about literature and culture.

I think she is very knowledgeable for several reasons. First, she has read hundreds of books in English and can remember details about characters, plots, and themes very well. Second, she always explains difficult concepts in simple ways that students can understand easily. Third, she often shares interesting facts about the historical and cultural background of the books we study. Many students, including me, improved their English significantly because of her teaching. She also won the “Best Teacher” award at our school twice, which shows that other people recognize her expertise too.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	6-7	Có khả năng nói liên tục, sử dụng linking words cơ bản (first, second, third), nhưng còn mechanical và thiếu flexibility
Lexical Resource	6-7	Từ vựng adequate với một số collocations (teaching methods, English literature), nhưng còn repetitive (a lot, know) và thiếu less common vocabulary
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	6-7	Sử dụng đúng các thì cơ bản, có một số complex sentences với relative clauses, nhưng chủ yếu là simple và compound sentences
Pronunciation	6-7	Rõ ràng và dễ hiểu, có thể có một số lỗi nhỏ nhưng không ảnh hưởng đến communication

Điểm mạnh:

• ✅ Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả các bullet points theo đúng thứ tự
• ✅ Có cấu trúc rõ ràng với introduction, body và conclusion
• ✅ Đưa ra nhiều lý do cụ thể ở phần explain
• ✅ Có ví dụ về achievement (giải thưởng) để minh chứng

Hạn chế:

• ⚠️ Từ vựng còn basic và lặp lại (know a lot, very well)
• ⚠️ Thiếu idiomatic expressions và sophisticated vocabulary
• ⚠️ Cấu trúc câu đơn giản, chưa thể hiện grammatical range
• ⚠️ Phần explain chưa đủ sâu về impact cá nhân và cảm xúc

---

📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8

Thời lượng: Khoảng 2 phút 10 giây

I’d like to describe Dr. Minh Nguyen, a remarkable individual who possesses extensive knowledge in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Dr. Nguyen is a senior researcher at the Vietnam National University’s AI Lab and also serves as a visiting lecturer at several international institutions. His area of specialization lies in natural language processing and computer vision, two cutting-edge branches of AI that are revolutionizing how machines understand and interpret human language and visual data. What makes him particularly impressive is that he’s published over 50 peer-reviewed research papers in prestigious international journals.

I first came across Dr. Nguyen about two years ago when I attended a public seminar he gave on the future of AI in Vietnam. I was so captivated by his presentation that I reached out to him afterwards, and surprisingly, he agreed to mentor me informally. Since then, we’ve stayed in touch through email and occasional meetings.

What truly sets him apart and demonstrates his profound expertise is multifaceted. Firstly, he has this incredible ability to break down highly complex technical concepts into digestible explanations that even non-experts can grasp. I remember asking him about neural networks, which seemed impossibly complicated, but he used everyday analogies that made it suddenly click for me. Secondly, his knowledge isn’t just theoretical – he’s successfully led multiple projects that have had real-world applications, including a speech recognition system now used by several Vietnamese companies. Additionally, he’s constantly keeping abreast of the latest developments in his field, often discussing recent breakthroughs before they even make mainstream news. What impresses me most, though, is his genuine passion for sharing knowledge. He doesn’t just answer questions; he encourages critical thinking and always pushes me to explore topics deeper. This combination of technical mastery, practical experience, and teaching prowess is what makes him truly exceptional in my eyes.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	7.5-8	Nói trôi chảy với minimal hesitation, sử dụng cohesive devices tự nhiên (Firstly, Secondly, Additionally), ý tưởng được organize logically
Lexical Resource	7.5-8	Sử dụng less common và idiomatic vocabulary (sets him apart, break down, click), collocations chính xác (cutting-edge, peer-reviewed), có paraphrasing
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7.5-8	Đa dạng cấu trúc với relative clauses, participle phrases, conditional, phần lớn error-free
Pronunciation	7.5-8	Clear articulation, appropriate stress và intonation, easy to understand

So Sánh Với Band 6-7

Khía cạnh	Band 6-7	Band 7.5-8
Vocabulary	“knows a lot about”, “interesting facts”	“possesses extensive knowledge”, “keeping abreast of”, “technical mastery”
Grammar	“She has read hundreds of books”	“He’s published over 50 peer-reviewed research papers” (present perfect với specific achievement)
Ideas	“She explains difficult concepts in simple ways”	“He has this incredible ability to break down highly complex technical concepts into digestible explanations that even non-experts can grasp” (chi tiết hơn, có ví dụ cụ thể)

---

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9

Thời lượng: 2 phút 40 giây đầy đủ

I’d like to talk about Professor Lan Pham, an extraordinarily erudite individual who has dedicated her life to the study and preservation of Vietnamese traditional music, particularly the intricate art of ca trù, a form of ceremonial singing that dates back centuries.

Professor Pham holds a doctorate in Ethnomusicology from the Sorbonne and currently serves as the director of the Institute of Musicology in Hanoi. Her area of expertise encompasses not only the technical and theoretical aspects of traditional Vietnamese musical forms but also their sociocultural significance and historical evolution. She’s particularly renowned for her groundbreaking research on the tonal patterns and rhythmic structures of ca trù, work that has been instrumental in reviving interest in this nearly extinct art form. What’s truly remarkable is that she’s not merely an academic observer – she’s also an accomplished performer, having trained under some of the last surviving master practitioners of this ancient tradition.

My connection with Professor Pham began in quite a serendipitous manner about four years ago. I was working on a documentary project about endangered cultural heritage when a colleague suggested I interview her. From the moment we met, I was struck by her depth of knowledge and infectious enthusiasm. What started as a professional relationship has evolved into something of a mentorship, albeit an informal one, where I’ve had the privilege of attending her lectures and even observing her fieldwork in rural communities where these musical traditions still cling to existence.

What sets Professor Pham apart and truly exemplifies her exceptional expertise is not just the breadth and depth of her academic achievements, though those are certainly impressive – she’s authored three seminal books and numerous scholarly articles that are now considered definitive works in her field. Rather, it’s the multidimensional nature of her knowledge that’s so extraordinary.

On an intellectual level, she possesses this remarkable capacity to draw connections between seemingly disparate elements – she can discuss how the linguistic tones of Vietnamese directly influenced musical scales, or how historical trade routes affected instrumental development. Her explanations are peppered with specific examples, anecdotes, and primary source references that demonstrate not just rote memorization but genuine comprehension and synthesis.

Beyond the theoretical realm, her practical mastery is equally impressive. I’ve watched her meticulously transcribe and annotate performances, catching subtle nuances in vocal ornamentation that even trained musicians might miss. She can identify regional variations in performance style just by listening, much like a sommelier distinguishing wines by terroir.

What truly distinguishes her, however, is her ability to contextualize this knowledge within broader frameworks. She doesn’t just understand music in isolation; she illuminates how it intersects with social hierarchies, religious practices, gender dynamics, and political movements throughout Vietnamese history. During one particularly enlightening conversation, she traced the evolution of a single musical phrase across three centuries, showing how it reflected changing aesthetic values and social structures.

Perhaps most compelling is her unwavering commitment to knowledge transmission. She’s trained dozens of students, established community programs to teach traditional music to young people, and tirelessly advocates for cultural preservation policies. This combination of scholarly rigor, artistic sensibility, and social consciousness represents, in my view, the epitome of what it means to be truly knowledgeable – not just accumulating information but understanding its significance and bearing responsibility for its continuity.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	8.5-9	Exceptionally fluent và coherent, speaks at length without noticeable effort, sử dụng sophisticated cohesive devices một cách natural
Lexical Resource	8.5-9	Wide range of vocabulary sử dụng với full flexibility và precision, idiomatic language natural, sophisticated collocations (bearing responsibility, cling to existence, seminal books)
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	8.5-9	Full range of structures với native-like control, rare minor errors, complex sentences constructed naturally
Pronunciation	8.5-9	Native-like pronunciation features, sustained appropriate intonation, effortless to understand

Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc

🎯 Fluency Hoàn Hảo:
Bài nói duy trì tempo tự nhiên suốt gần 3 phút, không có hesitation đáng kể, sử dụng discourse markers một cách tinh tế (Rather, Beyond the theoretical realm, Perhaps most compelling) để chuyển ý tưởng mượt mà.

📚 Vocabulary Tinh Vi:
Ví dụ: “extraordinarily erudite individual” thay vì “very knowledgeable person” – erudite là từ C2 level thể hiện kiến thức uyên bác qua đọc và học tập sâu rộng. “Intricate art” cho thấy sự phức tạp và tinh tế, “serendipitous manner” diễn tả sự tình cờ may mắn một cách elegant. “Peppered with” là idiom natural để nói về việc đan xen các ví dụ vào giải thích.

📝 Grammar Đa Dạng:
Ví dụ câu: “What started as a professional relationship has evolved into something of a mentorship, albeit an informal one, where I’ve had the privilege of attending her lectures” – kết hợp present perfect để nói về sự phát triển, relative clause để bổ sung thông tin, và “albeit” (mặc dù) để thêm nuance.

💡 Ideas Sâu Sắc:
Không chỉ liệt kê thành tựu mà phân tích đa chiều: intellectual mastery (khả năng kết nối kiến thức), practical skills (kỹ năng thực hành), contextual understanding (hiểu bối cảnh xã hội-văn hóa), và commitment to transmission (trách nhiệm truyền đạt). Điều này thể hiện critical thinking ở mức độ cao.

Giám khảo IELTS đang đánh giá thí sinh trả lời phần thi Speaking Part 2 về chuyên gia

Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)

Sau khi bạn kết thúc phần nói 2 phút, examiner thường hỏi thêm 1-2 câu ngắn để kết thúc Part 2 trước khi chuyển sang Part 3.

Question 1: Do you think you’ll stay in touch with this person?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, I hope so. I think it’s valuable to maintain contact with knowledgeable people because I can learn more from them in the future.

Band 8-9 Answer:
Absolutely, I certainly intend to maintain this connection. Given how much I’ve gained from our interactions, it would be shortsighted to let this relationship lapse. In fact, I’m hoping to collaborate with her on a project related to cultural documentation next year, which would deepen our professional relationship even further.

---

Question 2: Has this person inspired you to learn more about their field?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, definitely. After meeting them, I became more interested in their area and started reading more about it. I think their passion is contagious.

Band 8-9 Answer:
Tremendously so. Meeting Professor Pham has been nothing short of transformative for my perspective on cultural heritage. Her work has sparked a genuine fascination with ethnomusicology that I never knew I had, and I’ve since immersed myself in reading about not just Vietnamese traditional music but also comparative studies of musical traditions across Southeast Asia. It’s one thing to appreciate something superficially, but witnessing someone who embodies such deep expertise really ignites a desire to understand subjects at a more profound level.

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 trừu tượng và sâu sắc hơn, mở rộng từ chủ đề Part 2. Đây là phần khó nhất và quan trọng nhất để phân biệt thí sinh band 7+ và band 8+.

Yêu cầu của Part 3 bao gồm phân tích các vấn đề xã hội từ nhiều góc độ, so sánh và đối chiếu các khía cạnh khác nhau, đưa ra quan điểm cá nhân có lý lẽ thuyết phục, và xem xét cả advantages lẫn disadvantages của một vấn đề.

Chiến lược hiệu quả là mở rộng câu trả lời đến 3-5 câu hoặc 30-45 giây mỗi câu, sử dụng discourse markers để tổ chức ý tưởng (Well, Actually, From my perspective), đưa ra examples từ xã hội chứ không chỉ kinh nghiệm cá nhân, và thừa nhận sự phức tạp của vấn đề bằng cách xem xét nhiều perspectives.

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam trong Part 3 là trả lời quá ngắn thiếu phân tích sâu, không đưa ra lý lẽ cụ thể mà chỉ nói chung chung, thiếu từ vựng trừu tượng để thảo luận các vấn đề xã hội, và không biết cách acknowledge complexity của issue (chỉ nhìn một chiều).

Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu

Theme 1: Expertise and Knowledge in Society

---

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

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Cause and Effect – tìm nguyên nhân
• Key words: some people, become experts, while others don’t
• Cách tiếp cận: Đưa ra 2-3 factors chính (innate ability, dedication, circumstances), giải thích mỗi factor với example, có thể so sánh giữa những người thành công và không thành công

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think there are several reasons. First, some people have natural talent in certain areas, which makes it easier for them to learn. Second, becoming an expert requires a lot of hard work and dedication over many years. Not everyone is willing to spend that much time. Finally, opportunity is important – some people have access to good education and resources, while others don’t. So it’s a combination of talent, effort, and circumstances.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Có cấu trúc với First, Second, Finally
• Vocabulary: Adequate nhưng chưa sophisticated (natural talent, hard work)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Đưa ra được multiple reasons nhưng thiếu depth trong explanation, examples còn general, chưa có critical analysis

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Well, this is quite a multifaceted question that doesn’t have a simple answer. From my perspective, expertise development is the result of a complex interplay between several factors.

Firstly, there’s the element of intrinsic motivation and genuine passion for the subject matter. Those who truly excel in their fields typically aren’t driven solely by external rewards like money or status; rather, they possess an insatiable curiosity about their discipline. For instance, you’ll often find that renowned scientists describe their research as fascinating rather than laborious – this intrinsic drive sustains them through the inevitable challenges and setbacks that characterize the path to mastery.

Equally important is what psychologist Anders Ericsson termed “deliberate practice” – not just putting in hours, but engaging in focused, purposeful training that pushes beyond one’s comfort zone. Many people practice their craft, but experts distinguish themselves by constantly seeking feedback, identifying weaknesses, and systematically working to improve them. This requires not just time investment but also a particular mindset – what Carol Dweck calls a “growth mindset” – the belief that abilities can be developed rather than being fixed traits.

Beyond individual characteristics, we can’t overlook socioeconomic factors and access to opportunities. Someone might have tremendous potential, but without access to quality education, mentorship, or the luxury of time to dedicate to skill development, that potential may never be realized. This is why we see disparities in expertise development across different socioeconomic strata.

So ultimately, I’d argue that expertise emerges when innate aptitude, sustained effort, favorable circumstances, and perhaps a bit of luck all converge. It’s rarely just one factor, which is why predicting who will become an expert is so challenging.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Well-organized với clear signposting (Firstly, Equally important, Beyond individual characteristics, ultimately)
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (insatiable curiosity, intrinsic drive, deliberate practice, socioeconomic strata)
• Grammar: Complex structures với relative clauses, noun phrases, conditionals
• Critical Thinking: Shows nuanced understanding bằng cách reference research (Ericsson, Dweck), acknowledge multiple perspectives, và recognize complexity

💡 Key Language Features:

• Discourse markers: Well, From my perspective, Firstly, Equally important, Beyond, Ultimately
• Tentative language: typically, often, may, I’d argue – thể hiện academic caution
• Abstract nouns: intrinsic motivation, interplay, disparities, convergence
• Academic references: Anders Ericsson, Carol Dweck – thể hiện wide knowledge

---

Question 2: How has the way people acquire expertise changed with technology?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Change over time – so sánh past vs present
• Key words: acquire expertise, changed, technology
• Cách tiếp cận: So sánh traditional methods vs modern methods, đưa ra specific examples của technology, phân tích both positive và potential negative impacts

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Technology has changed how people learn a lot. In the past, people had to learn from books or teachers in person, but now they can learn online. There are many websites and apps where people can study almost anything. For example, YouTube has tutorials about everything from cooking to computer programming. Also, people can connect with experts around the world through the internet. However, there’s so much information online that it can be hard to know what is reliable.

Phân tích:

• Structure: So sánh past và present một cách cơ bản
• Vocabulary: Simple và repetitive (learn, a lot)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate comparison nhưng lacks depth, examples còn generic, chưa analyze impact thoroughly

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Technology has absolutely revolutionized the acquisition of expertise in ways that would have been unimaginable just a generation ago, and the transformation operates on multiple levels.

Most obviously, there’s been a democratization of access to knowledge. Whereas expertise development was once confined to those who could afford formal education or apprenticeships, now virtually anyone with internet access can tap into world-class resources. Platforms like Coursera or edX offer courses from top universities, often free of charge. More significantly, the on-demand nature of online learning allows people to learn at their own pace and on their own schedule, which is particularly beneficial for working adults who couldn’t otherwise pursue formal training.

Beyond just access, technology has transformed the learning process itself. Interactive simulations allow medical students to practice surgeries virtually before touching a real patient. AI-powered adaptive learning systems can tailor educational content to individual learning styles and knowledge gaps, something no traditional classroom could achieve at scale. The ability to rewind and replay complex explanations until concepts sink in is taken for granted now, but it’s a profound shift from the linear, one-shot nature of traditional lectures.

However, and this is crucial, technology has also introduced new challenges. The sheer volume of information can be overwhelming, and discerning quality resources from dubious ones requires a level of digital literacy that many lack. There’s also the phenomenon of superficial knowledge – people might dabble in many subjects without achieving depth in any, mistaking Google searches for genuine understanding. As the saying goes, we have “access to information” but that doesn’t automatically translate to “acquisition of wisdom.”

Moreover, certain aspects of expertise development still defy digitization. The tacit knowledge gained through face-to-face mentorship, the intuition developed through hands-on experience, and the soft skills like professional judgment that come from navigating real-world complexity – these remain challenging to replicate in purely virtual environments.

So in summary, technology has made expertise more accessible and customizable, but it’s not a panacea. The most effective approach likely involves leveraging technology’s strengths while recognizing its limitations and complementing it with traditional methods where appropriate.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Extremely well-organized với clear progression: democratization → transformed process → challenges → limitations → balanced conclusion
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (democratization, tacit knowledge, panacea, defy digitization)
• Grammar: Wide range with complex constructions, passive voice, conditionals, relative clauses used naturally
• Critical Thinking: Balanced analysis covering multiple dimensions (access, process, challenges, limitations), acknowledges both benefits và drawbacks, provides nuanced conclusion

💡 Key Language Features:

• Discourse markers: Most obviously, Beyond just access, However and this is crucial, Moreover, in summary
• Contrasting phrases: Whereas… now, was once… now virtually anyone
• Hedging/tentative language: likely, would have been, might, perhaps
• Academic vocabulary: democratization, acquisition, phenomenon, replicate, leverage

---

Theme 2: Education and Learning

Question 3: Do you think schools should focus more on developing specialists or well-rounded individuals?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Opinion/Argument – specialist vs generalist
• Key words: schools, specialists, well-rounded individuals
• Cách tiếp cận: Acknowledge both sides, đưa ra opinion có nuance (có thể balanced hoặc lean về một phía), provide reasoning và examples for both perspectives

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

This is a difficult question because both are important. I think schools should try to create well-rounded students because young people need to learn many different skills for life. They need to learn how to communicate, work in teams, and solve problems, not just study one subject deeply. However, for older students in university, specialization is necessary because they need to prepare for specific careers. So maybe the answer depends on the age of the students.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Recognizes complexity và attempts balance
• Vocabulary: Basic expressions (difficult question, many different skills)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Shows some critical thinking nhưng reasoning lacks depth, examples are vague

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is one of those perennial debates in education, and I think the answer isn’t binary – it’s not really an either-or proposition but rather a question of balance and timing.

Ideally, I’d argue that education should follow a progressive model where the emphasis shifts gradually from breadth to depth as students mature. In primary and early secondary education, cultivating a well-rounded foundation makes sense for several reasons. Firstly, young people are still discovering their passions and aptitudes – exposing them to diverse subjects increases the likelihood they’ll find something that truly resonates with them. A student might think they want to be a doctor until they discover a latent talent for music or an unexpected fascination with philosophy. Secondly, many of the challenges we face today are inherently interdisciplinary – climate change, for instance, requires understanding science, economics, politics, and ethics. A narrow specialist might excel within their domain but lack the peripheral vision to see how their work intersects with broader societal issues.

That said, as students reach upper secondary and tertiary education, I think there’s considerable merit in allowing deeper specialization. At this stage, students have typically developed sufficient self-awareness to make informed choices about their trajectories. Moreover, genuine expertise – the kind that drives innovation and advances human knowledge – typically requires years of focused study. The 10,000-hour rule popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, while somewhat oversimplified, captures the essence of how mastery develops: through sustained, focused practice in a specific domain.

However, even within specialization, I’d advocate for what we might call “T-shaped learning” – deep expertise in one area (the vertical stroke of the T) combined with broad competence across related fields (the horizontal stroke). A software engineer, for instance, might specialize in cybersecurity but should also understand user experience design, business strategy, and perhaps even ethical philosophy to create truly holistic solutions.

The crux of the matter is that both approaches have inherent value, and the optimal path likely varies by individual temperament, societal needs, and career trajectory. Some minds are naturally inclined toward specialization and thrive in deep, focused work, while others flourish with variety and cross-pollination of ideas. Rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all approach, education systems should strive for flexibility that accommodates both pathways while ensuring that specialists don’t become narrowly confined and generalists don’t remain superficial.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Sophisticated organization: establishes complexity → argues for progressive model → acknowledges value of specialization → proposes nuanced solution (T-shaped learning) → balanced conclusion
• Vocabulary: Exceptionally sophisticated (perennial debates, latent talent, peripheral vision, T-shaped learning, cross-pollination)
• Grammar: Complex structures used naturally throughout – conditionals, relative clauses, participial phrases, inversion
• Critical Thinking: Exceptional depth showing understanding of educational philosophy, references relevant concepts (10,000-hour rule, T-shaped learning), acknowledges individual differences, avoids oversimplification

💡 Key Language Features:

• Presenting balanced view: Ideally, That said, However, The crux of the matter
• Academic hedging: I’d argue, likely, somewhat, might, should
• Sophisticated connectors: Moreover, For instance, Rather than
• Metaphorical language: T-shaped learning, peripheral vision, cross-pollination

Thí sinh IELTS đang trả lời câu hỏi phân tích sâu trong Speaking Part 3 về giáo dục chuyên môn

---

Theme 3: Expertise in the Modern World

Question 4: In what ways can experts share their knowledge more effectively with the general public?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Problem-Solution/Suggestions
• Key words: experts, share knowledge, effectively, general public
• Cách tiếp cận: Identify current challenges trong knowledge communication, suggest multiple methods với specific examples, analyze effectiveness của các methods

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Experts can share their knowledge in several ways. They can write books or articles in simple language that everyone can understand. They can also give public talks or appear on TV programs to explain their work. Social media is another good way because many people use it, so experts can reach a large audience. Videos and podcasts are popular too because people can watch or listen while doing other things. The most important thing is to avoid using too much technical language that normal people won’t understand.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Lists methods systematically
• Vocabulary: Basic và somewhat repetitive (simple language, many people)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Provides adequate suggestions nhưng lacks depth trong analysis of effectiveness, examples are generic

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is actually a pressing concern in our current age, particularly as we face complex challenges like climate change or pandemics that require public understanding of scientific expertise. I think effective knowledge dissemination requires experts to adopt a multi-pronged approach.

First and foremost, experts need to master the art of translation – not linguistic translation, but conceptual translation – rendering complex ideas accessible without compromising accuracy. This is far more challenging than it sounds because it requires identifying the core essence of a concept and finding relatable analogies or metaphors that resonate with a lay audience. The physicist Richard Feynman was renowned for this ability – he could explain quantum mechanics using everyday scenarios like spinning plates or bouncing balls. This skill set isn’t typically cultivated in academic training, which tends to reward increasingly technical language, so perhaps universities should incorporate science communication into their curricula.

Secondly, leveraging diverse media platforms is crucial, but it needs to be done thoughtfully. While social media offers unprecedented reach, it also tends to favor bite-sized content that can sometimes oversimplify to the point of distortion. I think podcasts have emerged as a particularly promising medium because they allow for in-depth discussion – the long-form format lets experts unpack ideas gradually rather than compressing everything into soundbites. Platforms like TED Talks strike a nice balance between accessibility and substance, though even these need to avoid becoming overly entertaining at the expense of accuracy.

Another effective strategy involves collaborative storytelling – partnering with science journalists, documentary makers, or even artists who can translate expertise into compelling narratives. The documentary series “Cosmos” exemplifies this beautifully, making astrophysics captivating through stunning visuals and narrative arc. Humans are hardwired for stories, so framing scientific knowledge within narrative structures makes it more memorable and engaging.

Perhaps most importantly, experts should embrace dialogue rather than monologue. Interactive formats like Q&A sessions, citizen science projects, or online forums where people can ask questions foster genuine understanding rather than passive reception. When people can actively engage with the material, asking questions and exploring implications, knowledge sticks much better than when they’re simply lectured at.

That said, we should acknowledge that the onus shouldn’t fall entirely on experts. Media outlets, educational institutions, and policymakers also have roles to play in creating spaces for and amplifying expert voices. Moreover, there’s a broader cultural challenge around trust in expertise that needs addressing – even the most artful communication won’t penetrate if there’s fundamental distrust or skepticism toward experts themselves.

So in essence, effective knowledge sharing requires experts to develop communication skills, use diverse platforms strategically, collaborate with communication professionals, and engage audiences actively, while society simultaneously works to create receptive conditions for expert knowledge.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Exceptionally well-organized với multiple strategies presented systematically, each với detailed explanation và examples
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated và field-specific (conceptual translation, lay audience, bite-sized content, citizen science, the onus)
• Grammar: Full range of complex structures used naturally và accurately
• Critical Thinking: Shows exceptional depth acknowledging challenges (trust in expertise), providing concrete examples (Feynman, TED Talks, Cosmos), recognizing systemic issues beyond just expert behavior

💡 Key Language Features:

• Signposting: First and foremost, Secondly, Another effective strategy, Perhaps most importantly, That said, in essence
• Academic vocabulary: pressing concern, dissemination, multi-pronged approach, cultivated, leverage
• Exemplification: Richard Feynman was renowned for, Cosmos exemplifies, Platforms like TED Talks
• Nuanced language: far more challenging than it sounds, strike a nice balance, shouldn’t fall entirely on

---

Question 5: Do you think being an expert in one field can sometimes limit a person’s perspective?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Opinion với acknowledgment of potential drawback
• Key words: expert, limit, perspective
• Cách tiếp cận: Acknowledge the paradox (expertise brings depth but might narrow perspective), provide specific examples, discuss how to balance specialization với broader thinking

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I think this can happen. When people focus too much on one area, they might not see the bigger picture or understand other viewpoints. For example, a scientist might be very good at their research but not understand the social or economic impacts of their work. This is why it’s important for experts to also learn about other subjects and talk to people from different backgrounds. However, being an expert is still valuable because we need people with deep knowledge to solve difficult problems.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Presents opinion with basic reasoning
• Vocabulary: Adequate but simple (bigger picture, deep knowledge)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Shows awareness of the issue nhưng analysis lacks sophistication, example is generic

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is a fascinating question that touches on what psychologists call “functional fixedness” or what we might term the “curse of expertise.” I’d say the answer is unequivocally yes, but with important caveats.

The phenomenon is well-documented: as people develop deep expertise in a domain, they often develop entrenched cognitive frameworks – mental models that are highly effective within their specialty but can become intellectual blinkers when applied more broadly. There’s a famous saying: “To a person with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” An economist might reduce complex social issues to matters of market efficiency; a physician might medicalize problems that have underlying social causes. This tunnel vision isn’t necessarily due to intellectual deficiency but rather because expertise involves developing highly specialized neural pathways and pattern recognition systems that can inadvertently filter out information that doesn’t fit established schemas.

A compelling example is the 2008 financial crisis. Many economists with impeccable credentials failed to anticipate the collapse because their models, while sophisticated within their domain, didn’t account for irrational behavior, systemic risk, or the sociopolitical factors that other disciplines might have flagged. Their expertise, paradoxically, became a liability because it created overconfidence in narrow models.

Moreover, deep specialization can sometimes foster what we might call “epistemic arrogance” – an overestimation of one’s expertise extending beyond one’s actual domain. We’ve seen this during the pandemic, where experts in one medical specialty would sometimes make pronouncements about epidemiology or public health policy outside their wheelhouse, yet because they carried the title “doctor,” their views were given undue weight.

That being said, I think it’s crucial not to overgeneralize. Many truly distinguished experts actively guard against this limitation. They cultivate what’s called “intellectual humility” – an awareness of the boundaries of their knowledge. Some deliberately seek out collaborators from different disciplines, recognizing that complex problems demand interdisciplinary approaches. Others engage in what Edward de Bono called “lateral thinking,” deliberately stepping outside their expertise to gain fresh perspectives.

Furthermore, the problem isn’t expertise itself but rather siloed expertise – expertise that operates in isolation. When experts engage in cross-disciplinary dialogue, the richness of perspective that emerges often surpasses what any single discipline could offer. The field of bioinformatics, for instance, emerged from the intersection of biology, computer science, and statistics, and has yielded insights none of those fields could have achieved independently.

So to summarize, while expertise can indeed constrain perspective, this isn’t inevitable. It depends on whether experts remain cognizant of their limitations, actively cultivate breadth alongside depth, and engage meaningfully with perspectives outside their domain. The ideal, perhaps, is what’s sometimes called “informed generalism” – depth in one area accompanied by sufficient literacy across adjacent fields to see connections and avoid narrow-mindedness.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Exceptional organization: introduces concept with psychological term → provides evidence và examples → acknowledges counter-arguments → offers nuanced solution
• Vocabulary: Highly sophisticated with specialized academic terms (functional fixedness, epistemic arrogance, intellectual humility, siloed expertise)
• Grammar: Complex structures throughout including relative clauses, conditionals, passive constructions, all used naturally
• Critical Thinking: Outstanding depth với references to psychological concepts, historical example (2008 crisis), acknowledgment of complexity, balanced conclusion

💡 Key Language Features:

• Academic terminology: functional fixedness, curse of expertise, entrenched cognitive frameworks, epistemic arrogance
• Hedging and nuance: I’d say, often, might, can sometimes, isn’t necessarily
• Contrasting ideas: That being said, Furthermore, Moreover, paradoxically
• Metaphorical language: intellectual blinkers, tunnel vision, to a person with a hammer

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, kiến thức chuyên sâu	Her expertise in neuroscience is internationally recognized.	develop expertise, demonstrate expertise, area of expertise, technical expertise
erudite	adj	/ˈeruːdaɪt/	uyên bác, có học thức sâu rộng	Professor Lee is an erudite scholar who has published extensively.	erudite scholar, erudite discussion, remarkably erudite
well-versed in	adj phrase	/wel vɜːst ɪn/	thông thạo về, am hiểu về	She is well-versed in classical literature and modern poetry.	well-versed in the subject, remarkably well-versed, thoroughly well-versed
mastery	n	/ˈmɑːstəri/	sự thành thạo, khả năng làm chủ	His mastery of the piano is evident in every performance.	achieve mastery, demonstrate mastery, technical mastery, complete mastery
accumulate knowledge	v phrase	/əˈkjuːmjəleɪt ˈnɒlɪdʒ/	tích lũy kiến thức	She has accumulated vast knowledge through years of research.	accumulate extensive knowledge, gradually accumulate, systematically accumulate
in-depth knowledge	n phrase	/ɪn depθ ˈnɒlɪdʒ/	kiến thức chuyên sâu	The course provides in-depth knowledge of financial markets.	possess in-depth knowledge, acquire in-depth knowledge, demonstrate in-depth knowledge
proficiency	n	/prəˈfɪʃənsi/	sự thành thạo, trình độ cao	Her proficiency in multiple languages is impressive.	develop proficiency, demonstrate proficiency, high level of proficiency, proficiency in
authority	n	/ɔːˈθɒrəti/	chuyên gia được công nhận, thẩm quyền	He is considered an authority on medieval history.	leading authority, recognized authority, authority on/in
breakthrough	n	/ˈbreɪkθruː/	đột phá, tiến bộ đột phá	Her research led to a major breakthrough in cancer treatment.	major breakthrough, scientific breakthrough, achieve a breakthrough, make a breakthrough
cutting-edge	adj	/ˌkʌtɪŋ ˈedʒ/	tiên tiến nhất, tân tiến	The lab uses cutting-edge technology for genetic research.	cutting-edge research, cutting-edge technology, at the cutting edge
pioneering	adj	/ˌpaɪəˈnɪərɪŋ/	đi tiên phong, tiên phong	His pioneering work revolutionized the field of robotics.	pioneering research, pioneering work, pioneering efforts, pioneering study
renowned for	adj phrase	/rɪˈnaʊnd fɔː/	nổi tiếng về, được công nhận về	She is renowned for her contributions to environmental science.	internationally renowned, widely renowned, renowned for expertise
instrumental in	adj phrase	/ˌɪnstrəˈmentl ɪn/	đóng vai trò quan trọng trong	He was instrumental in developing the new vaccine.	instrumental in creating, instrumental in establishing, prove instrumental
groundbreaking	adj	/ˈɡraʊndbreɪkɪŋ/	mang tính đột phá	Her groundbreaking research changed medical practice.	groundbreaking research, groundbreaking work, groundbreaking discovery, groundbreaking study
comprehensive understanding	n phrase	/ˌkɒmprɪˈhensɪv ˌʌndəˈstændɪŋ/	sự hiểu biết toàn diện	He has a comprehensive understanding of economic theory.	develop comprehensive understanding, possess comprehensive understanding, demonstrate comprehensive understanding
delve into	v phrase	/delv ˈɪntuː/	đào sâu vào, nghiên cứu kỹ	She decided to delve into the complexities of quantum physics.	delve deeper into, delve into details, delve into research
grasp	v/n	/ɡrɑːsp/	nắm bắt, hiểu	He has an excellent grasp of statistical methods.	grasp the concept, firm grasp, thorough grasp, grasp of the subject
nuance	n	/ˈnjuːɑːns/	sắc thái, chi tiết tinh tế	Understanding the nuances of language takes years of study.	subtle nuance, cultural nuance, appreciate the nuances, grasp the nuances
tackle	v	/ˈtækl/	giải quyết, xử lý	She is well-equipped to tackle complex problems.	tackle challenges, tackle issues, effectively tackle, tackle problems head-on
cultivate	v	/ˈkʌltɪveɪt/	trau dồi, phát triển	He has cultivated his skills over many years of practice.	cultivate knowledge, cultivate expertise, cultivate skills, carefully cultivate

Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases

Cụm từ	Nghĩa	Ví dụ sử dụng	Band điểm
at the forefront of	đi đầu trong lĩnh vực	She is at the forefront of artificial intelligence research.	7.5-9
possess a wealth of knowledge	sở hữu kho kiến thức phong phú	Dr. Chen possesses a wealth of knowledge about ancient civilizations.	7.5-9
second to none	không ai sánh bằng, tốt nhất	His expertise in cardiac surgery is second to none.	7.5-8
leave no stone unturned	không bỏ sót điều gì, làm triệt để	In her research, she leaves no stone unturned.	7-8
push the boundaries	mở rộng ranh giới, vượt qua giới hạn	His work continuously pushes the boundaries of what’s possible.	8-9
a go-to person for	người mọi người tìm đến khi cần	She’s the go-to person for advice on digital marketing.	7-8
ahead of the curve	đi trước xu hướng, tiên phong	His research keeps him ahead of the curve in biotechnology.	7.5-8.5
draw on/upon	dựa vào, tận dụng	She draws on years of experience to solve complex problems.	7-8
stand out from the crowd	nổi bật hơn người khác	His innovative approach makes him stand out from the crowd.	7-8
the go-to expert	chuyên gia hàng đầu mọi người tìm đến	He’s become the go-to expert for climate change issues.	7.5-8.5
think outside the box	suy nghĩ sáng tạo, không theo틀틀틀틀틀	Her ability to think outside the box led to breakthrough discoveries.	7-8
stay abreast of	cập nhật liên tục về	He stays abreast of the latest developments in his field.	7.5-9

Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)

Để bắt đầu câu trả lời:

• 📝 Well,… – Sử dụng khi cần một chút thời gian suy nghĩ hoặc khi câu hỏi phức tạp
• 📝 Actually,… – Khi đưa ra góc nhìn khác hoặc làm rõ điều gì đó
• 📝 To be honest,… – Khi muốn nói thật hoặc chia sẻ quan điểm cá nhân chân thành
• 📝 I’d say that… – Cách lịch sự để đưa ra quan điểm
• 📝 From my perspective,… – Thể hiện đây là quan điểm cá nhân
• 📝 In my view,… – Tương tự, diễn đạt ý kiến cá nhân

Để bổ sung ý:

• 📝 On top of that,… – Thêm vào đó, bổ sung thêm
• 📝 What’s more,… – Hơn nữa, còn nữa
• 📝 Not to mention… – Chưa kể đến
• 📝 Furthermore,… – Hơn nữa (formal hơn)
• 📝 Additionally,… – Thêm vào đó
• 📝 Beyond that,… – Ngoài ra

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… chúng ta cũng cần xem xét
• 📝 That said,… – Điều đó nói rằng, tuy nhiên
• 📝 Having said that,… – Sau khi nói điều đó
• 📝 That being said,… – Tuy nhiên, mặc dù vậy

Để kết luận:

• 📝 All in all,… – Tóm lại, nhìn chung
• 📝 At the end of the day,… – Cuối cùng thì
• 📝 In essence,… – Về bản chất
• 📝 Ultimately,… – Rút cục, cuối cùng
• 📝 To sum up,… – Tóm lại

Để đưa ra ví dụ:

• 📝 For instance,… – Ví dụ như
• 📝 Take… for example – Lấy… làm ví dụ
• 📝 A case in point is… – Một trường hợp điển hình là
• 📝 To illustrate this,… – Để minh họa điều này

Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng

1. Conditional Sentences (Câu điều kiện):

Mixed conditional:

• Formula: If + Past Perfect, would/could + bare infinitive
• Ví dụ: “If he hadn’t dedicated decades to research, he wouldn’t be considered an authority today.”

Inversion for emphasis:

• Formula: Had + subject + past participle, subject + would have…
• Ví dụ: “Had she not pursued her passion for marine biology, many species might have remained undiscovered.”

2. Relative Clauses (Mệnh đề quan hệ):

Non-defining relative clauses:

• Formula: …, which/who…,
• Ví dụ: “Professor Smith, who has published over 100 papers, is regarded as a leading expert in the field.”

Reduced relative clauses:

• Formula: Subject + present participle/past participle
• Ví dụ: “The research conducted by Dr. Lee has revolutionized our understanding of genetics.”

3. Passive Voice (Câu bị động):

It is thought/believed/said that…

• Ví dụ: “It is widely believed that continuous learning is essential for maintaining expertise.”

Be + past participle + to infinitive:

• Ví dụ: “She is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable historians of her generation.”

4. Cleft Sentences (Câu chẻ):

What I find most… is…

• Ví dụ: “What I find most impressive about his expertise is his ability to explain complex concepts simply.”

The thing that… is…

• Ví dụ: “The thing that sets her apart from other experts is her genuine passion for teaching.”

It is/was… that/who…

• Ví dụ: “It was his dedication to research that earned him international recognition.”

5. Inversion for Emphasis:

Not only… but also…

• Ví dụ: “Not only does she have theoretical knowledge, but she also possesses extensive practical experience.”

Rarely/Seldom/Never + auxiliary + subject…

• Ví dụ: “Rarely have I encountered someone with such comprehensive understanding of the subject.”

6. Participle Clauses:

Present participle:

• Ví dụ: “Having spent 20 years researching climate patterns, he can predict weather changes with remarkable accuracy.”

Past participle:

• Ví dụ: “Trained by the best in the field, she quickly became an expert herself.”

7. Nominal Clauses (Mệnh đề danh từ):

What-clauses:

• Ví dụ: “What distinguishes true experts is not just their knowledge but their ability to apply it.”

Whether-clauses:

• Ví dụ: “Whether someone becomes an expert depends on various factors including dedication and opportunity.”

Chiến lược đạt điểm cao IELTS Speaking khi nói về người có kiến thức chuyên môn với sơ đồ tư duy

Bài viết này đã cung cấp cho bạn cái nhìn toàn diện về cách trả lời chủ đề “Describe a person who is very knowledgeable in their area of expertise” trong IELTS Speaking. Từ các câu hỏi cơ bản ở Part 1, cue card chi tiết ở Part 2 với bài mẫu từ Band 6 đến Band 9, cho đến các câu hỏi thảo luận sâu ở Part 3, tất cả đều được phân tích kỹ lưỡng từ góc độ của một giám khảo IELTS chính thức.

Điều quan trọng nhất cần nhớ là IELTS Speaking không chỉ đánh giá khả năng nói tiếng Anh của bạn mà còn đánh giá khả năng tư duy phản biện, tổ chức ý tưởng và thể hiện quan điểm cá nhân một cách thuyết phục. Đừng học thuộc template hay cố gắng sử dụng từ vựng quá phức tạp không phù hợp với ngữ cảnh. Thay vào đó, hãy tập trung vào việc phát triển ý tưởng sâu sắc, sử dụng từ vựng chính xác và tự nhiên, và quan trọng nhất là nói một cách tự tin và chân thành.

Với sự chuẩn bị kỹ lưỡng và luyện tập thường xuyên, bạn hoàn toàn có thể đạt được band điểm mục tiêu trong IELTS Speaking. Chúc bạn thành công trong kỳ thi sắp tới.