IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe a situation when you had to think critically” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

Chủ đề tư duy phản biện (critical thinking) là một trong những đề tài được giám khảo IELTS đặc biệt quan tâm bởi nó phản ánh khả năng phân tích, đánh giá và đưa ra quyết định hợp lý của thí sinh. Từ kinh nghiệm chấm thi hơn 20 năm, tôi nhận thấy đây là chủ đề thách thức nhiều học viên Việt Nam vì yêu cầu không chỉ kể chuyện mà còn phải thể hiện được quá trình suy nghĩ logic.

Chủ đề “Describe A Situation When You Had To Think Critically” xuất hiện với tần suất khá cao trong các kỳ thi IELTS từ năm 2020 đến nay, đặc biệt tăng đáng kể từ 2023. Theo thống kê từ các trung tâm thi thực tế và diễn đàn IELTS uy tín, đề tài này xuất hiện khoảng 15-20% trong tổng số đề Part 2, thường biến thể dưới dạng “describe a difficult decision”, “describe a time you solved a problem” hoặc “describe a situation requiring careful thought”. Dự đoán khả năng xuất hiện trong tương lai vẫn ở mức cao vì IELTS ngày càng tập trung đánh giá kỹ năng tư duy phản biện.

Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ học được:

• Phân tích chi tiết câu hỏi và cách tiếp cận hiệu quả cho cả 3 Part
• Bài mẫu đa dạng theo từng band điểm (6-7, 7.5-8, 8.5-9) với phân tích chuyên sâu
• Kho từ vựng chuyên biệt về critical thinking, problem-solving và decision-making
• Cấu trúc ngữ pháp phức tạp giúp nâng band điểm
• Chiến lược xử lý câu hỏi từ góc nhìn giám khảo chính thức
• Những lỗi phổ biến của học viên Việt Nam và cách khắc phục

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 xoay quanh cuộc sống hàng ngày, sở thích cá nhân và kinh nghiệm quen thuộc. Đối với chủ đề critical thinking, giám khảo thường không hỏi trực tiếp về thuật ngữ này mà sẽ dẫn dắt qua các tình huống liên quan đến việc đưa ra quyết định, giải quyết vấn đề trong đời sống.

Chiến lược quan trọng:

• Trả lời trực tiếp câu hỏi trong 1-2 câu đầu tiên
• Mở rộng bằng lý do hoặc ví dụ cụ thể (2-3 câu nữa)
• Sử dụng từ vựng đa dạng nhưng tự nhiên
• Thể hiện sự lưu loát bằng linking words

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

• Trả lời quá ngắn kiểu “Yes, I do” hoặc “No, I don’t” rồi im lặng
• Dùng từ vựng quá đơn giản như “good”, “bad”, “like”, “don’t like”
• Thiếu ví dụ cụ thể từ kinh nghiệm bản thân
• Ngập ngừng quá nhiều khi suy nghĩ
• Không biết cách mở rộng câu trả lời tự nhiên

Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp

Question 1: Do you consider yourself a careful decision-maker?

Question 2: When do you usually need to think carefully before making choices?

Question 3: Do you prefer to make quick decisions or take your time?

Question 4: Have you ever made a decision you regretted?

Question 5: Do you ask for advice when making important decisions?

Question 6: How do you usually solve problems in your daily life?

Question 7: Do you think young people make decisions differently from older people?

Question 8: What kind of decisions do you find most difficult to make?

Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết

---

Question: Do you consider yourself a careful decision-maker?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Trả lời Yes/No một cách rõ ràng
• Giải thích tại sao bạn nghĩ như vậy
• Đưa ra ví dụ cụ thể minh họa

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I think I’m quite careful when making decisions. I usually spend time thinking about the advantages and disadvantages before I choose something. For example, when I bought my phone last year, I compared many different models and read reviews online for about two weeks before making my final decision.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Câu trả lời trực tiếp, có lý do rõ ràng và ví dụ cụ thể từ cuộc sống
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng còn đơn giản (advantages/disadvantages, think about), cấu trúc câu chưa phức tạp
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Đáp ứng yêu cầu cơ bản với ý tưởng rõ ràng nhưng chưa thể hiện được vốn từ vựng và ngữ pháp nâng cao

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

I’d say I’m definitely a thoughtful decision-maker who tends to weigh up all the options before committing to anything significant. I’m not the type to make snap judgments because I’ve learned that hasty decisions often lead to regret. Take my recent laptop purchase, for instance – I spent nearly three weeks researching specifications, comparing price-to-performance ratios, and reading user testimonials before finally settling on a model that ticked all my boxes.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Sử dụng collocations tự nhiên (weigh up options, snap judgments, hasty decisions), cấu trúc câu phức (relative clause, compound sentences), từ vựng chính xác và tinh vi (committing, testimonials, ticked all boxes)
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Thể hiện khả năng sử dụng ngôn ngữ một cách linh hoạt với paraphrasing xuất sắc, ý tưởng được phát triển logic, và phát âm các cụm từ phức tạp một cách trôi chảy

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• thoughtful decision-maker: người đưa ra quyết định thận trọng, chu đáo
• weigh up options: cân nhắc các lựa chọn
• snap judgment: quyết định vội vàng, thiếu suy nghĩ
• hasty decision: quyết định vội vã
• tick all the boxes: đáp ứng đầy đủ các tiêu chí

---

Question: Do you prefer to make quick decisions or take your time?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Chọn một xu hướng (hoặc có thể nói “it depends”)
• Giải thích tại sao bạn có xu hướng đó
• Phân biệt các loại quyết định khác nhau

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

It depends on the situation. For small things like what to eat or what to wear, I make quick decisions because they’re not very important. But for big decisions like choosing a university or a job, I take my time to think carefully and ask other people’s opinions.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có sự phân biệt rõ ràng giữa các loại quyết định, câu trả lời có logic
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng lặp lại (decisions xuất hiện 3 lần), cấu trúc câu đơn giản
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Ý tưởng tốt nhưng cách diễn đạt chưa đa dạng, thiếu các cụm từ nâng cao

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

Well, it really hinges on the significance of what’s at stake. For mundane choices like selecting a meal or picking an outfit, I’m perfectly comfortable making spur-of-the-moment decisions since the consequences are relatively trivial. However, when it comes to life-altering choices such as career moves or major purchases, I’m definitely more deliberate in my approach. I’ll typically mull things over, seek input from trusted advisors, and evaluate the long-term implications before pulling the trigger on anything substantial.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Vocabulary đa dạng và sophisticated (hinges on, mundane, deliberate, mull over), sử dụng nhiều collocations tự nhiên, cấu trúc câu phức với linking devices rõ ràng
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Thể hiện sự control tuyệt vời về ngôn ngữ với range và accuracy cao, ý tưởng được nuanced và well-developed, sử dụng idiomatic language một cách tự nhiên

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• it hinges on: phụ thuộc vào
• mundane choices: các lựa chọn thông thường, tầm thường
• spur-of-the-moment decision: quyết định tức thời, không có kế hoạch trước
• life-altering choices: những lựa chọn thay đổi cuộc đời
• deliberate in approach: thận trọng trong cách tiếp cận
• mull things over: suy nghĩ kỹ lưỡng
• pull the trigger: đưa ra quyết định cuối cùng

---

Question: How do you usually solve problems in your daily life?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Mô tả quy trình giải quyết vấn đề của bạn
• Đưa ra ví dụ cụ thể
• Có thể đề cập đến việc tìm kiếm sự giúp đỡ nếu cần

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

When I have a problem, I first try to understand what the problem is. Then I think about different ways to solve it and choose the best one. If the problem is too difficult, I will ask my friends or family for help. For example, when my computer had a problem last month, I searched online for solutions first, and then asked my friend who knows about computers.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có quy trình rõ ràng, có ví dụ minh họa cụ thể
• Hạn chế: Từ “problem” lặp lại quá nhiều lần, cấu trúc câu đơn giản, thiếu từ vựng chuyên ngành
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Ý tưởng được trình bày logic nhưng cách diễn đạt chưa sophisticated

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

My problem-solving approach is fairly systematic. I usually start by identifying the root cause rather than just addressing the symptoms. Once I’ve pinpointed the core issue, I’ll brainstorm potential solutions and assess their feasibility based on the resources and time available. I’m also not too proud to tap into other people’s expertise when I’m out of my depth. Just recently, when my laptop started acting up, I first ran diagnostics myself, then consulted online forums, and eventually sought professional advice from a technician friend who walked me through some advanced troubleshooting steps I wouldn’t have figured out on my own.

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Vocabulary chuyên ngành rất phong phú (root cause, pinpoint, brainstorm, feasibility), cấu trúc câu đa dạng với nhiều mệnh đề phụ, sử dụng phrasal verbs tự nhiên (tap into, act up, walk through)
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Thể hiện systematic thinking với ý tưởng được develop rất tốt, ngôn ngữ precise và natural, range of grammar structures impressive

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• problem-solving approach: cách tiếp cận giải quyết vấn đề
• identify the root cause: xác định nguyên nhân gốc rễ
• pinpoint the core issue: chỉ ra chính xác vấn đề cốt lõi
• brainstorm potential solutions: động não tìm giải pháp tiềm năng
• assess feasibility: đánh giá tính khả thi
• out of my depth: vượt quá khả năng của tôi
• tap into expertise: khai thác kiến thức chuyên môn
• walk someone through: hướng dẫn ai đó từng bước

Học viên IELTS thực hành trả lời câu hỏi về kỹ năng giải quyết vấn đề và tư duy phản biện trong bài thi Speaking

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 trước khi nói. Đây là phần quan trọng nhất để thể hiện khả năng sử dụng ngôn ngữ một cách trôi chảy và tự nhiên. Với chủ đề critical thinking, bạn cần kể một câu chuyện cụ thể với đầy đủ chi tiết về bối cảnh, quá trình suy nghĩ và kết quả.

Chiến lược quan trọng:

• Sử dụng đầy đủ 1 phút để ghi chú keywords (không viết câu hoàn chỉnh)
• Nói ít nhất 1.5-2 phút, tốt nhất là đủ 2 phút
• Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả bullet points trên cue card
• Sử dụng thì quá khứ khi kể câu chuyện về một sự kiện cụ thể
• Mở rộng phần “explain” vì đây là nơi bạn ghi điểm cao nhất

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

• Không sử dụng hết thời gian chuẩn bị, vội vàng bắt đầu nói
• Nói dưới 1.5 phút và không biết cách kéo dài
• Bỏ sót một hoặc nhiều bullet points
• Quá tập trung vào kết quả mà quên mô tả quá trình suy nghĩ
• Sử dụng quá nhiều filler words (um, ah, you know)
• Không có cấu trúc rõ ràng, nhảy lung tung giữa các ý

Cue Card

Describe a situation when you had to think critically

You should say:

• What the situation was
• When and where it happened
• What you had to think about carefully
• And explain why this required critical thinking and how you felt about the outcome

Phân Tích Đề Bài

Dạng câu hỏi: Describe an experience – kể về một trải nghiệm cụ thể trong quá khứ

Thì động từ: Chủ yếu là quá khứ đơn (Past Simple) và quá khứ tiếp diễn (Past Continuous) để kể chuyện. Có thể dùng thì hiện tại hoàn thành khi liên hệ với hiện tại.

Bullet points phải cover:

1. What the situation was: Mô tả tình huống cụ thể – có thể là quyết định quan trọng, vấn đề cần giải quyết, hoặc tình huống phức tạp
2. When and where it happened: Thông tin về thời gian và địa điểm – cần cụ thể nhưng không dài dòng
3. What you had to think about carefully: Đây là phần quan trọng – liệt kê các yếu tố bạn phải cân nhắc, các góc độ phân tích
4. Explain why + how you felt: Phần này quan trọng nhất, thường chiếm 30-40% bài nói

Câu “explain” quan trọng: Phần “explain” yêu cầu hai khía cạnh: (1) tại sao tình huống này đòi hỏi critical thinking – bạn cần chứng minh tính phức tạp của vấn đề, và (2) cảm nhận về kết quả – thể hiện reflection và self-awareness. Đây là nơi bạn ghi điểm cao nhất về Lexical Resource và Grammatical Range.

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7

Thời lượng: Khoảng 1.5-2 phút

I’d like to talk about a time when I had to think very carefully before making a decision. This happened about six months ago when I was choosing which university to attend.

The situation was that I received offers from two universities. One was a famous university in Hanoi, and the other was a smaller university in my hometown. Both universities had good programs for my major, which is business administration.

I had to think about many different things. First, I considered the quality of education. The university in Hanoi had better rankings and more experienced professors. Second, I thought about the cost. Living in Hanoi would be much more expensive than staying in my hometown. I also had to think about being away from my family. If I went to Hanoi, I would only see them during holidays.

This required critical thinking because it wasn’t a simple choice. Both options had advantages and disadvantages. I couldn’t just choose based on one factor. I had to think about my future career, my family situation, and my financial situation all at the same time. I made lists of pros and cons for each option and talked to my parents and teachers.

In the end, I decided to go to the university in Hanoi. I felt it was the right decision for my future even though it was harder. Now I’m studying there and I think I made a good choice. Sometimes I miss my family, but I’m getting a good education and learning to be independent.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	6-7	Bài nói có cấu trúc rõ ràng với sequencing tốt (First, Second, In the end). Tuy nhiên còn thiếu các discourse markers phức tạp hơn. Có một số hesitation nhẹ nhưng không ảnh hưởng nhiều đến message
Lexical Resource	6	Từ vựng adequate nhưng chưa sophisticated. Sử dụng các từ phổ biến như “think about”, “good”, “advantages and disadvantages”. Thiếu collocations và idiomatic expressions
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	6-7	Sử dụng mix của simple và complex sentences. Có conditional sentences (If I went to Hanoi). Tuy nhiên phần lớn là cấu trúc đơn giản, thiếu variety
Pronunciation	6-7	Rõ ràng và dễ hiểu. Word stress cơ bản đúng nhưng thiếu intonation đa dạng để thể hiện emphasis

Điểm mạnh:

• ✅ Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả bullet points trên cue card
• ✅ Có cấu trúc logic: giới thiệu → tình huống → quá trình suy nghĩ → giải thích → kết quả
• ✅ Đưa ra ví dụ cụ thể về các yếu tố phải cân nhắc
• ✅ Có personal reflection ở phần cuối

Hạn chế:

• ⚠️ Từ vựng còn đơn giản, lặp lại nhiều từ như “think”, “good”, “university”
• ⚠️ Thiếu các cụm từ về critical thinking và decision-making
• ⚠️ Cấu trúc câu chưa đa dạng, phần lớn là simple và compound sentences
• ⚠️ Chưa thể hiện được depth trong phân tích quá trình tư duy

---

📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8

Thời lượng: Khoảng 2-2.5 phút

I’d like to describe a situation that really put my critical thinking skills to the test, which occurred about eight months ago when I was faced with a challenging career decision.

The situation was that I received a job offer from a multinational company in Ho Chi Minh City, right when I was in the middle of preparing for my Master’s degree entrance exam. So essentially, I had to decide between pursuing further education and jumping straight into the professional world. This happened in June last year, and I remember sitting at my desk at home, feeling completely torn between these two paths.

What made this decision particularly complex was the multitude of factors I had to weigh up. From a financial perspective, the job offer was attractive – it came with a competitive salary package and comprehensive benefits. However, on the flip side, my Master’s degree could potentially open more doors in the long run and enhance my career prospects significantly. I also had to consider the opportunity cost – if I took the job, I might lose momentum in my academic journey, but if I turned down the offer, I might not get such a good opportunity again. What’s more, there were personal factors to consider: my family’s financial situation, my own career aspirations, and even my mental readiness for either path.

This situation demanded critical thinking because there was no clear-cut right answer. Unlike simple decisions where one option is obviously superior, this required me to think beyond the surface level. I had to evaluate both short-term gains and long-term consequences, anticipate potential challenges in each scenario, and factor in unpredictable elements like the job market situation and my own adaptability. I remember creating detailed spreadsheets, consulting with mentors, and running through various scenarios in my mind.

Ultimately, I decided to defer my Master’s application by one year and accept the job offer. Looking back, I feel this was a well-reasoned decision. The professional experience I’ve gained has actually clarified my academic goals, and now I’m better positioned to pursue my Master’s with clearer objectives. The whole experience taught me that critical thinking isn’t just about logic – it’s about balancing rational analysis with personal values and being comfortable with uncertainty.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	7.5-8	Bài nói rất smooth với minimal hesitation. Sử dụng xuất sắc các discourse markers (essentially, on the flip side, what’s more, ultimately). Các ý được develop logic và connect tự nhiên
Lexical Resource	7.5-8	Vocabulary range impressive với nhiều collocations tự nhiên (put skills to test, weigh up factors, opportunity cost, clear-cut answer). Paraphrasing tốt (decide → make a decision → reach a conclusion)
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7.5-8	Đa dạng structures: mixed conditionals, relative clauses, participle clauses. Có một số lỗi minor nhưng không ảnh hưởng communication
Pronunciation	7.5-8	Clear với good sentence stress và intonation để highlight key points. Word stress chính xác trên các từ phức tạp

So Sánh Với Band 6-7

Khía cạnh	Band 6-7	Band 7.5-8
Vocabulary	“think about many things”, “advantages and disadvantages”	“weigh up factors”, “multitude of considerations”, “opportunity cost”
Grammar	“I had to think about the cost” (simple structure)	“What made this particularly complex was…” (cleft sentence), “Unlike simple decisions where…” (complex relative clause)
Ideas	Liệt kê các yếu tố một cách đơn giản	Phân tích sâu về financial perspective, opportunity cost, và personal values; thể hiện nuanced thinking

Tương tự như describe a law you think should be introduced, việc thể hiện tư duy phản biện và khả năng phân tích nhiều chiều là chìa khóa để đạt band điểm cao.

Thí sinh IELTS đang chuẩn bị ghi chú cho phần thi Speaking Part 2 về tình huống cần tư duy phản biện

---

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9

Thời lượng: 2.5-3 phút đầy đủ

I’d like to recount a situation that really brought my analytical abilities into sharp focus – it was when I found myself at a crossroads regarding a major business decision during my internship at a tech startup last summer.

To set the scene, I was working as a marketing intern at this promising startup in Hanoi, and the company had just secured seed funding from investors. The management team was grappling with a crucial question: should we allocate the bulk of this funding to aggressive customer acquisition through paid advertising, or should we invest more conservatively in product development and organic growth? As someone who’d been immersed in the market research, I was unexpectedly asked to weigh in on this decision – quite daunting for a 21-year-old intern, I must say.

What made this situation particularly intellectually demanding was the sheer complexity of variables at play. On one hand, pouring resources into customer acquisition could yield immediate results – we could rapidly scale our user base and capitalize on the current market momentum. This approach had the allure of quick wins and would certainly impress our investors in the short term. However, on the other hand, if our product wasn’t fully polished and we rushed to market, we’d risk acquiring customers who’d quickly churn, potentially tarnishing our brand reputation before we’d even established ourselves.

I had to think several moves ahead, almost like a chess game. I delved into our user data, scrutinized competitor strategies, and ran projections under various scenarios. What’s more, I had to factor in less quantifiable elements – team capacity, market timing, and even the psychological impact on our small team if we went all-in on an aggressive strategy that might backfire. The crux of the matter was that both paths had merit, but the stakes were extraordinarily high given our limited runway.

This situation epitomized critical thinking because it required me to transcend binary thinking. It wasn’t about choosing the “right” answer but rather about synthesizing information from multiple domains – financial projections, behavioral psychology, competitive analysis, and even organizational culture – to arrive at a nuanced recommendation. I had to challenge my own assumptions, interrogate the data for hidden insights, and anticipate second-order consequences that weren’t immediately obvious.

After considerable deliberation, I proposed a hybrid approach: allocate 60% of funds to product refinement with a laser focus on improving our core value proposition, while using the remaining 40% for targeted, data-driven customer acquisition in our most high-converting segments. I substantiated this recommendation with detailed analysis showing that this strategy would optimize our customer lifetime value while minimizing churn risk.

Reflecting on the outcome, I’m genuinely pleased with how things panned out. The company adopted my recommendation, and over the subsequent six months, we saw sustainable growth with a significantly lower customer acquisition cost than industry benchmarks. But beyond the tangible results, what I found most rewarding was the realization that critical thinking is fundamentally about intellectual humility – being willing to question your intuitions, embrace ambiguity, and make decisions with imperfect information. This experience has profoundly shaped how I approach complex problems, teaching me that the most valuable skill isn’t having all the answers, but rather asking the right questions and being comfortable navigating uncertainty.

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	9	Exceptionally fluent với natural flow. Sophisticated discourse markers (To set the scene, On one hand, The crux of the matter). Ý tưởng được develop một cách coherent và compelling
Lexical Resource	9	Vocabulary extraordinarily precise và flexible. Sử dụng idioms tự nhiên (at a crossroads, several moves ahead, panned out). Collocations sophisticated (seed funding, churn rate, customer lifetime value)
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	9	Full range of structures được sử dụng naturally: inversion (What made this…), participle clauses, mixed conditionals, complex nominalizations. Virtually error-free
Pronunciation	9	Native-like với excellent use của stress, rhythm, và intonation để convey subtle meanings. Pronunciation của complex multi-syllable words (extraordinarily, intellectually) chính xác

Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc

🎯 Fluency Hoàn Hảo:
Bài nói không có bất kỳ hesitation nào, với natural self-correction và reformulation. Sử dụng fillers một cách strategic (“I must say”, “quite daunting”) để thêm conversational tone chứ không phải vì thiếu vocabulary.

📚 Vocabulary Tinh Vi:
Ví dụ: “brought my analytical abilities into sharp focus” – đây là cách diễn đạt sophisticated hơn nhiều so với “tested my thinking skills”. “Grappling with” thay vì “dealing with” thể hiện struggle và complexity. “Transcend binary thinking” là academic phrase chứng tỏ depth of understanding về critical thinking.

📝 Grammar Đa Dạng:
Ví dụ: “What made this situation particularly intellectually demanding was the sheer complexity…” – đây là cleft sentence với nominal phrase phức tạp, thể hiện ability to manipulate language structure một cách sophisticated. Câu “I had to think several moves ahead, almost like a chess game” sử dụng simile và ellipsis một cách tự nhiên.

💡 Ideas Sâu Sắc:
Thí sinh không chỉ kể story mà còn demonstrate metacognitive awareness – reflecting on the thinking process itself. Câu “critical thinking is fundamentally about intellectual humility” cho thấy mature understanding vượt xa descriptive level, reaching analytical và philosophical depth.

🎨 Storytelling Compelling:
Bài nói có dramatic arc với clear beginning (setting the scene), rising action (describing complexity), climax (making the decision), và resolution (reflecting on outcome). Điều này giữ listener engaged suốt 3 phút.

---

Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)

Giám khảo thường hỏi thêm 1-2 câu ngắn sau Part 2 để transition sang Part 3. Những câu này thường đơn giản hơn và bạn chỉ cần trả lời ngắn gọn.

---

Question 1: Do you think you made the right decision in that situation?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, I think so. Looking at the results now, I believe it was a good decision. Of course, we can never know what would have happened if I chose differently, but I’m happy with how things turned out.

Band 8-9 Answer:
In hindsight, I’m fairly confident it was the right call. That said, I’m acutely aware that every decision involves some opportunity cost, and there’s always an element of counterfactual uncertainty – we can never truly know what would have transpired had I chosen differently. But judging by the tangible outcomes and the valuable lessons I gained, I’d say I made a well-informed choice given the information available at the time.

---

Question 2: Was it stressful to make that decision?

Band 6-7 Answer:
Yes, it was quite stressful. I felt a lot of pressure because it was an important decision and I didn’t want to make a mistake. I spent many sleepless nights thinking about it.

Band 8-9 Answer:
Absolutely, it was immensely stressful. The weight of responsibility, especially as an intern being entrusted with input on such a consequential decision, was palpable. I distinctly remember tossing and turning at night, running through scenarios in my head. However, I’d say the stress was productive rather than debilitating – it sharpened my focus and pushed me to be more thorough in my analysis. In a way, that pressure brought out the best in my critical thinking abilities.

IELTS Speaking Part 3: Two-way Discussion

Tổng Quan Về Part 3

Part 3 kéo dài 4-5 phút và là phần khó nhất, yêu cầu bạn thảo luận sâu về các vấn đề trừu tượng liên quan đến chủ đề Part 2. Với critical thinking, giám khảo sẽ hỏi về vai trò của tư duy phản biện trong xã hội, giáo dục, và các lĩnh vực khác.

Yêu cầu của Part 3:

• Phân tích và đánh giá các vấn đề phức tạp
• Đưa ra quan điểm cá nhân có lý lẽ vững chắc
• So sánh, đối chiếu các khía cạnh khác nhau
• Sử dụng ví dụ từ xã hội, không chỉ kinh nghiệm cá nhân
• Thể hiện critical thinking trong chính câu trả lời

Chiến lược thành công:

• Mở rộng câu trả lời đến 3-5 câu (30-60 giây)
• Sử dụng discourse markers để structure câu trả lời (Well, Actually, I’d argue that…)
• Acknowledge complexity của vấn đề (It depends, There are multiple perspectives…)
• Đưa ra both sides trước khi state opinion
• Sử dụng abstract nouns và academic vocabulary

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

• Trả lời quá ngắn, thiếu elaboration
• Không đưa ra lý lẽ rõ ràng để support opinion
• Thiếu từ vựng trừu tượng và academic
• Chỉ nói về personal experience thay vì societal level
• Không thể maintain coherence trong câu trả lời dài
• Oversimplify complex issues

Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu

Theme 1: Education and Critical Thinking

---

Question 1: Do you think schools should teach students how to think critically?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Opinion question – yêu cầu bạn đưa ra quan điểm và justify
• Key words: “schools”, “teach”, “think critically”
• Cách tiếp cận: Direct answer (Yes/No) → Reason 1 + example → Reason 2 + example → Potential challenge/counter-argument (optional) → Conclusion

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Yes, I definitely think schools should teach critical thinking. This is very important for students’ future. When students learn to think critically, they can solve problems better and make good decisions in their lives. For example, they can analyze information on the internet instead of just believing everything they read. Also, critical thinking helps students in their careers because employers want workers who can think independently. So I believe schools should include this in their curriculum.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Có opinion rõ ràng và 2 reasons with examples, nhưng còn đơn giản
• Vocabulary: Adequate nhưng repetitive (think critically xuất hiện 2 lần, good/better), thiếu synonyms
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Ý tưởng relevant và clear nhưng development chưa sâu, thiếu complexity và nuance

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Absolutely, I’d go so far as to say that cultivating critical thinking skills should be a cornerstone of modern education. In an era characterized by information overload and rampant misinformation, the ability to discern credible sources, evaluate arguments, and challenge assumptions has become paramount.

From a practical standpoint, students equipped with critical thinking skills are better positioned to navigate complexity in both their personal and professional lives. They don’t just passively absorb information but actively interrogate it, asking questions like “What’s the evidence?”, “Who benefits from this narrative?”, or “What are the alternative explanations?”. This intellectual rigor translates directly into workplace competencies that employers increasingly prize – problem-solving, innovation, and adaptive thinking.

Beyond utilitarian benefits, there’s also a civic dimension to consider. Democratic societies fundamentally rely on citizens who can engage with complex issues, weigh competing perspectives, and make informed judgments. Without critical thinking, people become susceptible to manipulation, whether through sensationalist media, echo chambers, or political rhetoric. Education systems that prioritize rote memorization over analytical skills are, in essence, failing to prepare students for participatory citizenship.

That said, I’d acknowledge that implementing such education poses challenges – it requires teachers who are themselves skilled critical thinkers and comfortable with students questioning established ideas. But these challenges are well worth confronting given the transformative potential of embedding critical thinking throughout the curriculum.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Exceptionally well-organized: Direct strong answer → Practical benefits with examples → Civic/societal benefits → Acknowledgment of challenges → Reaffirmation
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (cornerstone, rampant misinformation, interrogate, utilitarian benefits, participatory citizenship). Natural collocations (information overload, intellectual rigor, echo chambers)
• Grammar: Full range: cleft sentences (What’s the evidence?), relative clauses, passive constructions, conditional meaning (Without critical thinking…)
• Critical Thinking: Shows balanced view by acknowledging implementation challenges, demonstrates ability to analyze issue from multiple angles (practical, civic, pedagogical)

💡 Key Language Features:

• Discourse markers: Absolutely, From a practical standpoint, Beyond utilitarian benefits, That said
• Tentative language: I’d go so far as to say, I’d acknowledge that, poses challenges
• Abstract nouns: information overload, misinformation, intellectual rigor, participatory citizenship, transformative potential
• Academic phrases: characterized by, translates directly into, in essence, well worth confronting

---

Question 2: How has the way people think critically changed with technology?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Change/Compare question – yêu cầu so sánh past vs present
• Key words: “changed”, “technology”
• Cách tiếp cận: Acknowledge the change → Describe how (positive aspects) → Describe how (negative aspects) → Overall assessment

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Technology has changed the way people think in many ways. On the positive side, people now have access to much more information on the internet, so they can research things easily. For example, if you want to check if some news is true, you can search online quickly. However, technology also has negative effects. Many people just read headlines on social media and don’t think carefully about the information. They also spend less time thinking deeply because everything is fast now. So I think technology is both good and bad for critical thinking.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Có comparison nhưng còn basic, thiếu specific examples
• Vocabulary: Repetitive (people, technology, think), từ vựng general (good, bad, many ways)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Ideas relevant nhưng analysis superficial, thiếu depth và sophisticated vocabulary

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Well, this is fascinating because technology has created something of a paradox when it comes to critical thinking. On the one hand, digital tools have democratized access to information to an unprecedented degree. Someone with a smartphone now has more knowledge at their fingertips than was available in entire libraries just decades ago. This should theoretically enhance critical thinking – people can fact-check claims instantly, access diverse perspectives, and cross-reference sources with remarkable ease.

However, paradoxically, these same technologies have also introduced new cognitive challenges that can undermine critical thinking. The algorithmic curation of content on social media creates filter bubbles where people are primarily exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. What’s more, the sheer volume of information, combined with attention-fragmenting interfaces, has cultivated what some researchers call “shallow thinking” – people skim content rather than engaging deeply, they click through articles without reading critically, and they make snap judgments based on emotionally charged headlines.

There’s also been a subtle shift in the locus of cognitive work. When people can Google anything instantly, there’s less incentive to develop strong analytical frameworks or retain knowledge. Some cognitive scientists argue we’re outsourcing our memory to devices, which may free up cognitive resources for other tasks, but could also mean we’re not building the foundational knowledge that underpins sophisticated critical thinking.

All things considered, I’d say technology is neither inherently beneficial nor detrimental to critical thinking – it’s amplified both possibilities. The key difference is that critical thinking in the digital age requires additional competencies: information literacy, awareness of algorithmic bias, and conscious effort to seek out opposing viewpoints. Those who actively cultivate these skills can leverage technology to think more critically than ever before, while those who don’t may find their thinking becoming more polarized and superficial.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Sophisticated structure with paradox framework: positive developments → counterbalancing negatives → deeper cognitive implications → nuanced conclusion
• Vocabulary: Exceptionally rich (democratized access, algorithmic curation, filter bubbles, locus of cognitive work, polarized). Domain-specific terms used naturally
• Grammar: Complex structures throughout: conditionals (should theoretically), passive (are primarily exposed to), nominalization (the sheer volume of information)
• Critical Thinking: Demonstrates high-order thinking by identifying paradox, citing research (cognitive scientists), and resisting binary good/bad conclusion

Việc phân tích sự thay đổi này cũng tương tự như cách chúng ta xem xét what would your town or village be improved ielts, nơi technology đóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc cải thiện cơ sở hạ tầng và đời sống cộng đồng.

---

Question 3: Do you think critical thinking skills are innate or can they be developed?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Nature vs Nurture question
• Key words: “innate” (bẩm sinh), “developed” (phát triển được)
• Cách tiếp cận: Acknowledge both sides → Explain which one you think is more important → Provide evidence/reasoning → Conclusion

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think critical thinking can be both natural and learned. Some people are naturally good at analyzing things and asking questions. Maybe they were born with this ability. But I also believe that people can learn to think critically through education and practice. For example, when I was in school, I learned how to evaluate information and look at different sides of an issue. So I think everyone can improve their critical thinking skills if they try. Even if some people have a natural advantage, practice is still very important.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Balanced view nhưng reasoning chưa sâu
• Vocabulary: Basic expressions (good at, born with, look at different sides)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Position clear và có personal example, nhưng thiếu evidence from broader context và sophisticated argumentation

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is one of those nature-versus-nurture questions that I find particularly intriguing. While there’s likely some baseline variation in people’s cognitive aptitudes – some individuals may have predispositions toward analytical or questioning mindsets – I’d firmly argue that critical thinking is predominantly a learned skill that can be systematically developed.

The evidence for this is actually quite compelling. Research in cognitive psychology shows that critical thinking involves specific mental operations – like recognizing logical fallacies, evaluating evidence quality, or identifying hidden assumptions – that improve measurably with targeted instruction and practice. These aren’t mysterious innate talents but rather concrete techniques that can be taught. For instance, studies comparing students before and after critical thinking courses consistently show significant gains, regardless of baseline aptitude.

What’s more, if we look at critical thinking from a developmental perspective, we see that even young children, when exposed to the right pedagogical approaches – like Socratic questioning or inquiry-based learning – can develop surprisingly sophisticated analytical skills. This suggests that environmental factors and education play a far more decisive role than innate capacity.

That said, I wouldn’t completely dismiss the notion that some people may have slight natural advantages – perhaps greater working memory capacity or innate curiosity – that make acquiring these skills somewhat easier. But here’s the crucial point: even individuals without these advantages can attain high levels of critical thinking through deliberate practice and appropriate scaffolding.

In essence, I see critical thinking as analogous to learning a musical instrument – while natural aptitude may influence the pace of progress, virtually anyone can achieve proficiency through sustained effort and quality instruction. The real danger lies in the deterministic belief that critical thinking is fixed at birth, because this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that discourages people from cultivating these essential skills.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Nuanced argument: acknowledge both sides → strong position with evidence → developmental perspective → address counter-argument → powerful analogy and conclusion
• Vocabulary: Academic và precise (cognitive aptitudes, pedagogical approaches, self-fulfilling prophecy, deterministic belief). Natural collocations (baseline variation, measurably improve, sustained effort)
• Grammar: Sophisticated structures: comparative constructions (far more decisive role than), conditional meanings (even individuals without), complex nominalizations
• Critical Thinking: Exceptional depth – cites research evidence, uses developmental perspective, employs analogy effectively, addresses implications of different beliefs

Minh họa quá trình phát triển kỹ năng tư duy phản biện từ cơ bản đến nâng cao

Theme 2: Critical Thinking in the Workplace

---

Question 1: Why do employers value critical thinking skills?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Reason/Explanation question
• Key words: “employers”, “value”
• Cách tiếp cận: Multiple reasons approach: Reason 1 → Reason 2 → Reason 3 → Conclusion linking to broader context

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

Employers value critical thinking because it helps workers do their jobs better. Employees with good critical thinking can solve problems without always asking their managers for help. They can also make better decisions when they face difficult situations. For example, if there’s a problem with a customer, a critical thinker can find a good solution quickly. Also, companies want employees who can adapt to changes, and critical thinking helps with this. In today’s fast-changing business world, this skill is becoming more important.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Multiple reasons presented but connections between them chưa clear
• Vocabulary: Repetitive (good, better, problem), thiếu business-specific terminology
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Relevant content nhưng analysis còn superficial, thiếu specific business contexts

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

From an employer’s perspective, critical thinking has become nothing short of essential in today’s increasingly complex business landscape. Let me break this down into several key dimensions.

First and foremost, critical thinkers are effective problem-solvers who can navigate ambiguity without requiring constant supervision. In dynamic work environments where unforeseen challenges are the norm rather than the exception, employees who can diagnose root causes, generate creative solutions, and implement fixes independently are invaluable assets. This translates directly into operational efficiency and reduced management overhead.

Secondly, there’s an innovation imperative at play. Companies that want to remain competitive need employees who can challenge the status quo, identify opportunities others miss, and think beyond conventional approaches. Critical thinkers don’t just execute tasks – they question processes, suggest improvements, and spot inefficiencies. This kind of continuous improvement mindset is what drives organizational evolution.

Moreover, in an era of data abundance, critical thinking is crucial for making sense of information. Employees are inundated with metrics, reports, and analyses, but raw data means nothing without the ability to extract insights, identify patterns, and distinguish signal from noise. Critical thinkers can synthesize complex information and distill it into actionable recommendations, which is immensely valuable for strategic decision-making.

There’s also a risk mitigation angle. Employees who think critically are less likely to make costly errors because they scrutinize assumptions, consider consequences, and evaluate options carefully before acting. In high-stakes industries like finance, healthcare, or engineering, this prudent approach can prevent disasters and save significant resources.

Ultimately, I think the premium placed on critical thinking reflects a fundamental shift in work itself. We’ve moved from an economy that valued routine task execution to one that prizes complex problem-solving and adaptive thinking. Critical thinking is, in many respects, the defining competency of the knowledge economy.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Masterful organization with clear signposting (First and foremost, Secondly, Moreover, Ultimately). Each reason fully developed with implications
• Vocabulary: Business-specific và sophisticated (management overhead, innovation imperative, knowledge economy, risk mitigation). Natural business collocations
• Grammar: Full range including: cleft sentences (what drives), participle phrases (distinguishing signal from noise), complex nominalization (The premium placed on)
• Critical Thinking: Multi-dimensional analysis covering efficiency, innovation, data literacy, risk, and economic shifts. Shows deep understanding of business context

---

Theme 3: Society and Decision-Making

---

Question 1: Do you think people make better decisions now compared to the past?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Compare past and present with evaluation
• Key words: “better decisions”, “now”, “past”
• Cách tiếp cận: This is complex, acknowledge it → How decisions are different now (not necessarily better) → Challenges today → Nuanced conclusion

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

I think it depends on what kind of decisions we’re talking about. In some ways, people now can make better decisions because they have more information. The internet gives us access to knowledge that people in the past didn’t have. For example, before buying something, we can read reviews and compare prices easily. But in other ways, maybe people in the past made better decisions because they had fewer choices and less stress. Today, we have too many options, which can make decisions harder. So I would say it’s mixed – some decisions are easier now, but some are more difficult.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Balanced view với examples, nhưng analysis chưa deep
• Vocabulary: Basic comparative language (better, easier, harder, more/less)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Shows awareness of complexity nhưng reasoning còn surface-level, thiếu psychological/sociological depth

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

This is a deceptively complex question because “better” is quite context-dependent. I’d actually challenge the premise somewhat and argue that it’s not so much that decisions are better or worse, but rather that the decision-making landscape has fundamentally transformed in ways that present both advantages and challenges.

On the plus side, contemporary decision-makers have unprecedented access to information and analytical tools. Someone choosing a medical treatment today can consult peer-reviewed research, access patient forums, and obtain second opinions with relative ease – luxuries that weren’t available to previous generations. Similarly, in financial decisions, people can leverage sophisticated modeling tools and real-time data that enable more informed choices. So in terms of information availability, we’re clearly better positioned.

However, paradoxically, this abundance has introduced new cognitive challenges that may actually impair decision quality. Psychologists have documented phenomena like “choice overload” – when faced with too many options, people often make worse decisions or avoid deciding altogether. Think about something as simple as choosing a streaming service or a phone plan – the sheer number of options can be paralyzing. Our ancestors making decisions with limited choices may have experienced less analysis paralysis.

What’s more, the accelerated pace of modern life means decisions often must be made under time pressure, which compromises deliberation. Coupled with constant digital distractions that fragment attention, many people today are making decisions in suboptimal cognitive states. Research suggests that decision fatigue – the deteriorating quality of decisions after making many in succession – is increasingly prevalent in our choice-saturated environment.

There’s also the question of social and cultural wisdom. In traditional societies, decision-making often drew upon collective wisdom, community norms, and time-tested heuristics passed down through generations. While these weren’t infallible, they provided useful frameworks. Today’s hyper-individualistic approach, where everyone is expected to optimize every decision personally, may sometimes lead to reinventing wheels or making avoidable mistakes.

All things considered, I’d say we have greater potential to make excellent decisions today, provided we develop appropriate meta-cognitive skills – like information filtering, recognizing cognitive biases, and knowing when to rely on heuristics versus deep analysis. But without these skills, the very advantages of modernity – information, choice, tools – can become liabilities. So the answer isn’t a simple yes or no, but rather “we can, if we’re intentional about it.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Sophisticated argument that challenges question assumptions: reframe the question → advantages with examples → paradoxical challenges with research → pace/distraction factors → cultural-historical perspective → nuanced, conditional conclusion
• Vocabulary: Academic và psychologically sophisticated (choice overload, analysis paralysis, decision fatigue, meta-cognitive skills, cognitive biases, heuristics). Seamless integration of technical terms
• Grammar: Full native-like range: inversion (So in terms of…), subjunctive mood (provided we develop), complex conditional (can become liabilities)
• Critical Thinking: Exceptional intellectual maturity – challenges premise, cites psychological research, considers historical/cultural dimensions, acknowledges that “better” is conditional. Demonstrates metacognitive awareness about decision-making itself

Khi chúng ta suy nghĩ về quyết định cải thiện không gian sống, có thể tham khảo thêm Describe a place where you go to spend time outdoors để hiểu cách các yếu tố môi trường ảnh hưởng đến quá trình ra quyết định.

---

Question 2: How can people develop better critical thinking skills?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Solution/Suggestion question
• Key words: “develop”, “critical thinking skills”
• Cách tiếp cận: Multiple practical strategies with explanations

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

There are several ways people can improve their critical thinking. First, they should read more books and articles to learn different viewpoints. Second, they can practice asking questions about information they receive instead of just accepting it. Schools and workplaces can also help by providing training programs. Additionally, people should try to discuss issues with others who have different opinions, because this helps them see things from other perspectives. Finally, I think solving puzzles or playing strategy games can also help develop logical thinking skills.

Phân tích:

• Structure: List of suggestions nhưng thiếu depth trong each point
• Vocabulary: Basic action verbs (read, practice, try), general nouns (books, things, issues)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Practical suggestions nhưng explanations superficial, thiếu specific examples và deeper rationale

---

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

Well, cultivating critical thinking is really about developing a set of habits and mental disciplines that become second nature over time. Let me outline what I see as the most impactful approaches.

First and foremost, I’d emphasize deliberate practice with reasoning. This means actively seeking out complex problems or arguments and working through them systematically – identifying premises, evaluating evidence, spotting logical fallacies, and considering alternative conclusions. This could involve activities like analyzing opinion pieces and constructing counterarguments, dissecting case studies, or even engaging with philosophy texts that force you to grapple with abstract reasoning. The key is that it needs to be effortful and focused, not passive consumption.

Secondly, intellectual humility is crucial – which means actively seeking out perspectives that challenge your own. This is admittedly uncomfortable, but it’s precisely in that discomfort that critical thinking develops. I’d recommend intentionally reading sources across the ideological spectrum, engaging in good-faith discussions with people who hold different worldviews, and regularly asking yourself “What if I’m wrong about this?” This guards against confirmation bias and intellectual complacency.

Another powerful strategy is metacognitive reflection – essentially, thinking about your thinking. After making a decision or forming a judgment, take time to examine your reasoning process: What assumptions did I make? What information did I give more weight to and why? Were there emotional factors influencing my thinking? This kind of self-analysis helps you recognize patterns in your thinking and identify blind spots.

From an educational standpoint, exposure to diverse disciplines is tremendously valuable. Each field – whether it’s science, history, literature, or mathematics – offers distinct modes of analysis and ways of constructing knowledge. Someone versed in scientific methodology learns to value empirical evidence, while someone studying history learns to consider context and multiple narratives. This interdisciplinary literacy makes for more nuanced, adaptable thinkers.

Lastly, I’d stress the importance of engaging with uncertainty constructively rather than rushing to premature closure. Critical thinkers are comfortable sitting with ambiguity and saying “I don’t know yet” while they gather more information. This might involve practices like suspending judgment, entertaining multiple hypotheses simultaneously, and revising views as new evidence emerges.

The overarching principle here is that critical thinking isn’t something you achieve and then possess – it’s an ongoing practice that requires conscious cultivation. It’s less about reaching a destination and more about committing to a particular way of engaging with ideas, information, and the world at large.

Phân tích:

• Structure: Comprehensive và pedagogically sound: practice with reasoning → intellectual humility → metacognition → interdisciplinary learning → embracing uncertainty → philosophical conclusion
• Vocabulary: Exceptionally sophisticated (deliberate practice, intellectual humility, metacognitive reflection, premature closure, interdisciplinary literacy). Natural academic collocations
• Grammar: Native-like complexity: participle phrases (thinking about your thinking), reduced relative clauses (someone versed in), cleft structures (it’s precisely in that discomfort)
• Critical Thinking: Demonstrates deep understanding of cognitive development, references specific concepts from educational psychology and philosophy. Shows awareness of both practical and philosophical dimensions

Từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng

Topic-Specific Vocabulary

Từ vựng/Cụm từ	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ	Collocation
weigh up options	phrasal verb	/weɪ ʌp ˈɒpʃənz/	cân nhắc các lựa chọn	Before making my final decision, I needed to weigh up all the options carefully.	weigh up the pros and cons, weigh up alternatives, carefully weigh up
snap judgment	noun	/snæp ˈdʒʌdʒmənt/	phán đoán vội vàng	Making a snap judgment without considering all factors can lead to regret.	make a snap judgment, avoid snap judgments, resist snap judgments
thought-provoking	adj	/θɔːt prəˈvəʊkɪŋ/	kích thích tư duy, gây suy nghĩ	The documentary was thought-provoking and made me reconsider my views.	thought-provoking question, thought-provoking discussion
deliberate	adj	/dɪˈlɪbərət/	thận trọng, có chủ đích	I took a deliberate approach to solving this problem.	deliberate decision, deliberate approach, deliberate consideration
critical analysis	noun	/ˈkrɪtɪkəl əˈnæləsɪs/	phân tích phản biện	The essay requires critical analysis of the author’s arguments.	conduct critical analysis, provide critical analysis, require critical analysis
evaluate	verb	/ɪˈvæljueɪt/	đánh giá	We need to evaluate the evidence before drawing conclusions.	evaluate options, evaluate information, carefully evaluate
scrutinize	verb	/ˈskruːtənaɪz/	xem xét kỹ lưỡng	The committee scrutinized every detail of the proposal.	scrutinize carefully, closely scrutinize, thoroughly scrutinize
multifaceted	adj	/ˌmʌltiˈfæsɪtɪd/	nhiều khía cạnh	This is a multifaceted problem requiring comprehensive solutions.	multifaceted issue, multifaceted approach, multifaceted problem
cognitive bias	noun	/ˈkɒɡnətɪv ˈbaɪəs/	thiên kiến nhận thức	Cognitive biases can distort our judgment without us realizing.	overcome cognitive bias, recognize cognitive bias, common cognitive biases
analytical thinking	noun	/ˌænəˈlɪtɪkəl ˈθɪŋkɪŋ/	tư duy phân tích	Analytical thinking is essential in scientific research.	develop analytical thinking, apply analytical thinking, strong analytical thinking
assess feasibility	verb phrase	/əˈses ˌfiːzəˈbɪləti/	đánh giá tính khả thi	Before investing, we must assess the feasibility of the project.	assess feasibility carefully, assess economic feasibility
root cause	noun	/ruːt kɔːz/	nguyên nhân gốc rễ	Identifying the root cause of the problem took several weeks.	identify root cause, address root cause, determine root cause
implications	noun	/ˌɪmplɪˈkeɪʃənz/	hệ quả, tác động	We need to consider the long-term implications of this decision.	long-term implications, practical implications, far-reaching implications
counterargument	noun	/ˈkaʊntərˌɑːɡjumənt/	lập luận phản bác	A strong essay should address potential counterarguments.	present counterargument, consider counterarguments, refute counterarguments
nuanced	adj	/ˈnjuːɑːnst/	tinh tế, có nhiều sắc thái	Her nuanced understanding of the issue impressed everyone.	nuanced view, nuanced approach, nuanced perspective
synthesize information	verb phrase	/ˈsɪnθəsaɪz ˌɪnfəˈmeɪʃən/	tổng hợp thông tin	Good researchers can synthesize information from multiple sources.	effectively synthesize, synthesize diverse information
logical fallacy	noun	/ˈlɒdʒɪkəl ˈfæləsi/	ngụy biện logic	Recognizing logical fallacies helps you avoid weak arguments.	identify logical fallacies, common logical fallacies, avoid logical fallacies
evidence-based	adj	/ˈevɪdəns beɪst/	dựa trên bằng chứng	We need an evidence-based approach to policy-making.	evidence-based decision, evidence-based practice
dilemma	noun	/dɪˈlemə/	tình thế tiến thoái lưỡng nan	I faced a dilemma between career advancement and family time.	moral dilemma, ethical dilemma, face a dilemma
discern	verb	/dɪˈsɜːn/	phân biệt, nhận ra	It can be difficult to discern fact from opinion online.	discern patterns, discern truth, difficult to discern

Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases

Cụm từ	Nghĩa	Ví dụ sử dụng	Band điểm
put someone’s thinking to the test	thử thách khả năng tư duy	This complex case really put my analytical skills to the test.	7.5-9
think several moves ahead	suy nghĩ trước nhiều bước	Like a chess player, good strategists think several moves ahead.	7.5-9
at a crossroads	ở ngã rẽ quan trọng	I was at a crossroads in my career when this opportunity appeared.	7-8.5
the crux of the matter	trọng tâm vấn đề	The crux of the matter is whether we prioritize short-term or long-term gains.	8-9
take something with a pinch of salt	cần thận trọng, không nên tin hoàn toàn	You should take social media news with a pinch of salt.	7-8
pull the trigger	đưa ra quyết định cuối cùng	After months of deliberation, I finally pulled the trigger on the investment.	7.5-8.5
in hindsight	nhìn lại quá khứ	In hindsight, I should have considered more options.	7-8
a double-edged sword	con dao hai lưỡi	Technology is a double-edged sword for critical thinking.	7-8.5
toss and turn	trằn trọc	I was tossing and turning all night worrying about the decision.	7-8
mull something over	suy nghĩ kỹ lưỡng	I need time to mull over this proposal before responding.	7.5-8.5
jump to conclusions	vội kết luận	We shouldn’t jump to conclusions without examining all evidence.	7-8
see the forest for the trees	nhìn được bức tranh toàn cảnh	Sometimes we get so focused on details we can’t see the forest for the trees.	8-9
play devil’s advocate	đóng vai người phản biện	Let me play devil’s advocate and challenge that assumption.	7.5-8.5
food for thought	điều đáng suy ngẫm	His presentation certainly gave us food for thought.	7-8
in two minds about	phân vân giữa hai lựa chọn	I’m in two minds about accepting this job offer.	7-8
hit the nail on the head	nói trúng vấn đề	Your analysis really hit the nail on the head.	7.5-8.5

Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)

Để bắt đầu câu trả lời:

• 📝 Well,… – Dùng khi bạn cần một chút thời gian suy nghĩ, tạo tính tự nhiên
• 📝 Actually,… – Khi bạn muốn đưa ra góc nhìn khác hoặc thông tin bất ngờ
• 📝 To be honest,… – Khi muốn nhấn mạnh sự chân thành trong quan điểm
• 📝 I’d say that… – Cách diplomatic để đưa ra ý kiến cá nhân
• 📝 From my perspective,… – Nhấn mạnh đây là quan điểm chủ quan
• 📝 Looking at it from a different angle,… – Giới thiệu một cách nhìn mới

Để bổ sung ý:

• 📝 On top of that,… – Thêm một lý do hoặc ví dụ nữa
• 📝 What’s more,… – Tương tự “Moreover” nhưng conversational hơn
• 📝 Not to mention… – Nhấn mạnh một điểm quan trọng thường bị bỏ qua
• 📝 Beyond that,… – Mở rộng ra khía cạnh xa hơn
• 📝 Another thing to consider is… – Giới thiệu một yếu tố khác
• 📝 It’s also worth noting that… – Chỉ ra một điểm đáng chú ý

Để đưa ra quan điểm cân bằng:

• 📝 On the one hand,… On the other hand,… – Cấu trúc cổ điển cho hai mặt vấn đề
• 📝 While it’s true that…, we also need to consider… – Acknowledge một điểm nhưng balance với điểm khác
• 📝 That said,… – Chuyển sang điểm đối lập sau khi đưa ra một ý
• 📝 Having said that,… – Tương tự “That said”
• 📝 At the same time,… – Giới thiệu một khía cạnh song song
• 📝 However, paradoxically,… – Chỉ ra một mâu thuẫn thú vị

Để giải thích và làm rõ:

• 📝 What I mean is… – Clarify ý tưởng vừa nói
• 📝 In other words,… – Paraphrase để làm rõ
• 📝 To put it another way,… – Diễn đạt lại bằng cách khác
• 📝 Let me explain… – Introduce explanation chi tiết
• 📝 The point I’m trying to make is… – Nhấn mạnh main point
• 📝 Essentially,… – Tóm tắt ý chính

Để đưa ra ví dụ:

• 📝 For instance,… – Academic hơn “for example”
• 📝 Take… for example – Introduce specific example
• 📝 A case in point is… – Ví dụ minh họa điển hình
• 📝 To illustrate this,… – Dẫn dắt vào illustration
• 📝 This can be seen in… – Chỉ ra nơi có thể thấy ví dụ

Để kết luận:

• 📝 All in all,… – Tóm tắt toàn bộ discussion
• 📝 At the end of the day,… – Informal way to conclude
• 📝 Ultimately,… – Kết luận về điểm quan trọng nhất
• 📝 In the final analysis,… – Formal conclusion
• 📝 All things considered,… – Sau khi xem xét tất cả các yếu tố
• 📝 The bottom line is… – Kết luận trực tiếp và rõ ràng

Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng

1. Conditional Sentences (Câu điều kiện):

Mixed conditional (kết hợp quá khứ và hiện tại):

• Formula: If + Past Perfect, … would/could + infinitive
• Ví dụ: “If I had not thought critically about that decision, I wouldn’t be where I am today.”
• Khi nào dùng: Nói về một điều kiện trong quá khứ và kết quả trong hiện tại

Inversion for emphasis:

• Formula: Should/Were/Had + subject + verb…
• Ví dụ: “Had I known the implications, I would have approached it differently.”
• Khi nào dùng: Tạo formal tone và nhấn mạnh điều kiện

2. Relative Clauses (Mệnh đề quan hệ):

Non-defining relative clauses:

• Formula: …, which/who/whose…
• Ví dụ: “Critical thinking, which involves systematic analysis, is essential in the modern workplace.”
• Lưu ý: Luôn có dấu phẩy, bổ sung thông tin không thiết yếu

Reduced relative clauses:

• Formula: Subject + participle phrase
• Ví dụ: “The decision facing me was extremely complex.” (= The decision that was facing me)

3. Passive Voice (Câu bị động):

Impersonal passive (rất academic):

• It is thought/believed/said that…
• Ví dụ: “It is widely believed that critical thinking can be taught.”

Get passive (informal, conversational):

• Ví dụ: “I got confused by all the contradictory information.”

4. Cleft Sentences (Câu chẻ – nhấn mạnh):

What-cleft:

• Formula: What + subject + verb + is/was…
• Ví dụ: “What I find most challenging is balancing intuition with analysis.”
• Công dụng: Nhấn mạnh object hoặc action

It-cleft:

• Formula: It + be + focus + that/who…
• Ví dụ: “It was the financial implications that concerned me most.”
• Công dụng: Nhấn mạnh một element cụ thể

The thing that-cleft:

• Formula: The thing that… is…
• Ví dụ: “The thing that makes critical thinking difficult is managing cognitive biases.”

5. Inversion (Đảo ngữ – formal và emphatic):

Negative adverbials:

• Ví dụ: “Never before have we had so much information at our disposal.”
• Ví dụ: “Rarely do people consider the long-term implications.”

Only + time expression:

• Ví dụ: “Only after careful analysis did I realize the complexity.”

6. Nominalisation (Danh từ hóa – academic style):

• Verb → Noun: decide → decision, analyze → analysis, think → thinking
• Ví dụ: Instead of “I decided carefully” → “My decision was carefully considered“
• Tại sao band cao: Tạo formal, academic tone; cho phép bạn add modifiers; compact information

Khi nói về không gian thư giãn ngoài trời, có thể xem describe a park you enjoy visiting for relaxation để hiểu thêm về cách môi trường tự nhiên hỗ trợ quá trình suy nghĩ và ra quyết định.

7. Participle Clauses (Mệnh đề phân từ):

Present participle (showing simultaneous action):

• Ví dụ: “Weighing up all the options, I finally decided to accept the offer.”

Perfect participle (showing prior action):

• Ví dụ: “Having considered all perspectives, I reached a conclusion.”

8. Subjunctive Mood (Thức giả định – formal suggestions/recommendations):

• Formula: Subject + suggest/recommend/propose + that + subject + base verb
• Ví dụ: “I would suggest that schools incorporate critical thinking into all subjects.”
• Lưu ý: Không chia động từ theo ngôi thứ ba

9. Fronting (Đưa element lên đầu câu để nhấn mạnh):

• Ví dụ: “What concerned me most was the ethical dimension.”
• Ví dụ: “Seldom in my life had I faced such a difficult choice.”

---

Lời khuyên từ góc nhìn Examiner

Với hơn 20 năm kinh nghiệm chấm thi IELTS Speaking, tôi muốn chia sẻ một số insights quan trọng giúp bạn maximize band điểm khi trả lời về chủ đề critical thinking:

🎯 Những điều giám khảo đánh giá cao:

1. Authenticity over perfection: Chúng tôi nhận ra ngay khi thí sinh đang recite memorized answers. Một câu trả lời tự nhiên với một-hai lỗi nhỏ vẫn tốt hơn một câu hoàn hảo nhưng robotic.

2. Personal stories with reflection: Đừng chỉ kể chuyện – hãy analyze nó. Câu “Looking back, I realize that…” hoặc “This experience taught me…” cho thấy mature thinking.

3. Nuanced views: Thế giới không đen trắng. Những câu trả lời acknowledge complexity (“It depends”, “There are multiple perspectives”) với reasoning rõ ràng thường đạt band cao hơn.

4. Natural conversation flow: Sử dụng discourse markers một cách tự nhiên, không mechanical. “Well…”, “Actually…”, “Having said that…” nên xuất hiện organic, không phải theo công thức.

❌ Những lỗi khiến bạn mất điểm:

1. Over-complicated vocabulary sử dụng sai: Dùng từ đơn giản chính xác tốt hơn từ phức tạp dùng sai. “I thought carefully” tốt hơn “I contemplated profoundly” nếu bạn không tự nhiên với “contemplate”.

2. Memorized phrases quá obvious: Khi mọi câu đều bắt đầu bằng “From my perspective” hoặc “There are various factors to consider”, chúng tôi biết bạn đang dùng template.

3. Lack of examples: Abstract ideas cần concrete illustrations. Đừng chỉ nói “Critical thinking is important” – hãy cho một example cụ thể.

4. Không trả lời đúng câu hỏi: Thỉnh thoảng thí sinh chuẩn bị sẵn một topic và cố gắng twist bất kỳ câu hỏi nào về phía đó. Hãy lắng nghe carefully và address exactly what’s being asked.

💡 Chiến thuật ghi điểm:

• Part 1: Mục tiêu 3-4 câu mỗi answer. Sentence 1: Direct answer. Sentence 2-3: Reason/explanation. Sentence 4: Example hoặc additional detail.

• Part 2: Structure rõ ràng với signposting. “Let me start by describing…”, “What made this particularly challenging was…”, “Looking back, I feel…”

• Part 3: Aim for 4-6 câu mỗi answer. Show you can develop ideas systematically: General statement → Explanation → Example → Counter-point (if relevant) → Conclusion.

🔑 Secret to Band 8+:

Band 8-9 không phải về việc không có lỗi – ngay cả native speakers cũng có hesitations và self-corrections. Điều khác biệt là:

• Lexical precision: Chọn từ chính xác nhất cho context
• Grammatical flexibility: Sử dụng variety of structures naturally
• Idea development: Ý tưởng được explore thoroughly và intelligently
• Discourse management: Câu trả lời coherent, easy to follow
• Pronunciation features: Stress và intonation để convey meaning effectively

Khi thảo luận về những trải nghiệm văn hóa đáng nhớ, việc áp dụng tư duy phản biện cũng quan trọng như trong describe a recent cultural festival you enjoyed, nơi bạn cần phân tích và đánh giá các khía cạnh khác nhau của sự kiện.

🎓 Practice strategies:

1. Record yourself: Nghe lại recordings để identify repetitive phrases, filler words, và pronunciation issues.

2. Time yourself: Practice nói đúng duration: Part 1 (4-5 phút tổng), Part 2 (2 phút), Part 3 (4-5 phút tổng).

3. Get feedback: Từ teachers hoặc study partners về pronunciation, grammar errors, và idea development.

4. Build topic vocabulary organically: Thay vì học lists, đọc articles về các topics và note down phrases trong context.

5. Think in English: Practice internal monologue bằng tiếng Anh về daily decisions và problems bạn encounter.

Final thought: Critical thinking trong IELTS không chỉ là nội dung câu trả lời – chính cách bạn structure và develop ideas đã demonstrate critical thinking. Hãy xem mỗi câu hỏi như một opportunity to showcase not just your English, but your thinking ability.

Chúc bạn thành công trong kỳ thi IELTS Speaking! Remember: Confidence, clarity, và authenticity là foundation. Technical perfection sẽ đến với practice, nhưng genuine communication skills mới là điều giám khảo truly value.