Module 6 · Listening & Speaking Strands · Lesson 23
Speaking Part 4 Discussion
Extended examiner-led discussion after the long turn
Get talking · Section 1
4 minWarm-up
Most candidates' Part 3 discussion answers peak in the first 15 seconds and then either repeat or trail off. Why? What's the missing move that would let the answer GROW after 15 seconds?
How do you concede a point WITHOUT undermining your own argument? 'I see your point, but I still think…' is one. Name two more.
Reframe this dull stance ('AI is good for education') into something a Part 3 discussion examiner would find ALIVE. Use 'It depends what you mean by…' as your opener.
Grammar focus · Section 2
8 minAnchored stance and concession — extending without contradicting yourself
Quick rule
The high-band Part 3 discussion answer shape: (1) ANCHOR ('I'd argue that…'), (2) EXEMPLIFY ('For example…'), (3) CONCEDE ('That said,…' / 'Granted,…'), (4) REFRAME ('So perhaps the real question is…'). The concession does NOT cancel the anchor; it deepens it.
Examples
Anchor + exemplify: 'I'd argue that AI in education works as a personal tutor more than as a teacher. For example, my younger brother uses it for maths drills.'
Concede + reframe: 'Granted, it can also encourage shortcuts — but that's true of any tool. The deeper question is what we want students to BE, not what we want them to DO.'
Concession that strengthens: 'That said, I take the point about over-reliance. If anything, it sharpens the case for teaching kids when NOT to use it.'
Reframe move: 'So perhaps the real question isn't whether AI helps, but who designs it.'
Quick check
Question 1.Best CONCESSION that doesn't undermine the stance:
Question 2.The REFRAME move:
Question 3.Which is an ANCHORED stance?
Question 4.When the examiner says 'What about the other side?', the strongest move is:
Question 5.Why is the concession move marked highly?
Build the sentence → spot the natural chunks → say it aloud → reply like a real conversation.
1.Build an anchored stance sentence.
2.Build a concession that doesn't fold.
3.Build a reframe sentence.
Vocabulary · Section 3
6 minWords & phrases to own
I'd argue that
anchoring frame — strong but not absolute
e.g. I'd argue that screen time is less the issue than screen CONTEXT.
Use it now
Use 'I'd argue that' on a topic you feel strongly about.
↻ Recycled in speaking
granted, …
concession opener that doesn't fold
e.g. Granted, AI can encourage shortcuts — but that's true of any tool.
Use it now
Use 'granted' to concede a real counter-argument to your view.
↻ Recycled in speaking
that said
softer concession + redirect marker
e.g. That said, the deeper issue is who designs the tool.
Use it now
Pair 'that said' with a redirect to your stance.
↻ Recycled in speaking
the deeper question
reframe device — moves the conversation a level up
e.g. So perhaps the deeper question isn't whether AI helps but who shapes it.
Use it now
Reframe a dull question into a 'deeper' version.
↻ Recycled in speaking
if anything
intensifier that turns a concession back into support
e.g. If anything, the over-reliance argument strengthens my case.
Use it now
Practise: 'Granted, ___ . If anything, that ___.'
↻ Recycled in speaking
it depends what you mean by
definitional reframe — buys 15 seconds and sharpens stance
e.g. It depends what you mean by 'replace' — supplement is a different word.
Use it now
Use 'it depends what you mean by ___' to open a 90-second answer.
↻ Recycled in speaking
Pair / group discussion
- Which of today's frames most expands your answer WITHOUT padding?
- Which two would you MOST want available in the exam room?
Complete each stem about yourself
- I'd argue that ______, primarily because ______.…
- Granted, ______ — but ______.…
- That said, the deeper question is ______.…
- If anything, ______ strengthens the case for ______.…
Rank & justify
Rank by how much each one buys you EXTENSION time without sounding hollow.
- it depends what you mean by
- the deeper question
- granted, …
- I think
- if anything
Quick write (60 seconds)
Write a 60-word answer to 'Is competition good for children?' using anchor → exemplify → concede → reframe.
Pronunciation · Section 4
3 minThe concession pause — earning the redirect
After 'Granted, X' a one-beat pause makes the redirect ('— but Y') land with weight. No pause = the concession sounds like a throwaway. A good rule: pause for the time it takes to think 'now I'm pivoting'.
- GRANTed || AI can enCOURage SHORTcuts || BUT THAT'S true of ANY tool.
- That SAID || the DEEPer QUESTion || is WHO DEsigns it.
- If ANYthing || the OVER-reLIance arGUment || STRENGTHens my CASE.
- It deOENDS what you MEAN by 'reOLACE' || SUPplement is a DIFFerent WORD.
Reading · Section 5
8 minReading P5 (spiral) — opinion text · 'Is AI tutoring the end of teaching?'
The Times Education Supplement · opinion piece
Reading P5 (spiral) — opinion text · 'Is AI tutoring the end of teaching?'
A short opinion piece designed to give you stance + counter-stance vocabulary you can recycle into your Part 3 discussion answer in 20 minutes.
Eleni Markou · contributing writer · May 2026
The pessimists tell us AI tutoring will hollow out the teaching profession within a decade. The optimists promise a personalised tutor for every child. Both are wrong, but interestingly so. AI tutoring does what good drilling has always done — repetition, instant feedback, low-stakes practice — and it does it cheaply enough to scale. What it CANNOT do is form the relational scaffolding that turns a confused child into a confident one. The teacher who senses that a student is anxious, not lazy, and adjusts accordingly, is performing a different category of work entirely.
The deeper question — the one neither camp asks — is what we want school to BE. If school is about transmitting information, AI tutoring is an obvious efficiency. If school is about forming citizens, the case for human teaching is overwhelming. Granted, drilling and citizenship aren't mutually exclusive; the most likely future is a hybrid in which AI handles the practice and teachers handle the formation. The argument isn't really about AI at all; it's about which parts of teaching we never noticed were the most valuable.
Question 1.The writer's main stance is that:
Question 2.What is the 'deeper question' the writer raises?
Question 3.How does the writer characterise both camps?
Question 4.What does the writer think the most likely future is?
Question 5.Which sentence is closest to a Part 3 discussion REFRAME move you could borrow?
Q1.The writer believes both the pessimists and the optimists about AI tutoring are entirely correct.
Q2.The writer implies that relational scaffolding is something AI tutoring cannot currently provide.
Q3.According to the writer, the real debate is fundamentally about what school is FOR, not about AI itself.
Q4.The writer dismisses a hybrid future of AI-plus-teachers as unlikely.
Listening · Section 6
8 minListening — two Part 3 discussion model answers compared (Band 3 vs Band 5)
Notes
Two answers to the same Part 3 discussion question
- ▸Candidate A delivers a Band-3 answer (35 seconds): stance only.
- ▸Candidate B delivers a Band-5 answer (90 seconds): anchor → exemplify → concede → reframe.
- ▸Identify the four moves in B's answer.
Listening audio
Tap play to listen. Scrub the bar or use ± 5 s to jump.
Show transcript
Candidate A (Band 3):Yes, I think technology helps because students can find information easily. Also, it's faster. And teachers can use videos. So yes, it's good.
Candidate B (Band 5):It depends what you mean by 'helped'. I'd argue technology has expanded access to information enormously — my cousin in a small village now studies astrophysics with materials from MIT. That's a real democratising win. Granted, the same technology has fragmented attention spans in ways we're only starting to understand; teachers tell me students struggle with extended texts in a way they didn't ten years ago. But that's not really an argument against technology — if anything, it sharpens the case for teaching focus as an explicit skill. So perhaps the deeper question is whether schools are TEACHING students to use technology well, rather than just letting them figure it out alone.
Question 1.How long is Candidate A's answer?
Question 2.Candidate A is Band 3 because:
Question 3.Candidate B's ANCHOR is:
Question 4.Candidate B's CONCESSION is:
Question 5.Candidate B's REFRAME is:
Visual stimulus · Section 7
3 minThe four-move Part 3 discussion answer skeleton
Every Band-5 Part 3 discussion answer fits this shape. The four moves can be in any order, but all four should be visible by the 90-second mark.
Notes
Part 3 discussion four-move skeleton
- ▸1. ANCHOR — 'I'd argue that ___, primarily because ___.'
- ▸2. EXEMPLIFY — 'For example, ___ / In my own experience, ___.'
- ▸3. CONCEDE — 'Granted, ___ / That said, ___.'
- ▸4. REFRAME — 'So perhaps the deeper question is ___.'
- ▸Optional 5. INVITE — 'But I'd be curious whether you see it differently.'
Discuss in pairs
Take any topic you care about. Sketch the four moves in 60 seconds.
Exam skills · Section 8
3 minCPE Speaking Part 4 — Discussion
Strategy
- 1.Open every answer with an ANCHOR — never with 'um, well, I think maybe…'.
- 2.Reach the CONCESSION move by the 30-second mark.
- 3.Reach the REFRAME by the 60-second mark.
- 4.If the examiner follows up with 'What about X?', use a CONCEDE + REFRAME — never a flat repeat.
- 5.If you hit a topic you know nothing about, use 'It depends what you mean by ___' to buy time and sharpen the question.
- 6.Don't undermine your own stance. The concession DEEPENS the anchor; it doesn't cancel it.
Example
Q: 'Is competition good for children?' A: 'I'd argue competition becomes useful around age 9 — primarily because it teaches children to lose without collapse. In my own school, the inter-house chess league did this beautifully. Granted, competition can also entrench inequality — the kids with the most resources tend to win. But that's an argument for designing competition WELL, not for abolishing it. So perhaps the deeper question is how we structure competition, not whether to have it.'
Practice · Section 9
7 minFill in the blank
Question 1.____ , AI can encourage shortcuts — but that's true of any tool.
Question 2.If ____ , the over-reliance argument STRENGTHENS my case.
Question 3.It depends what you ____ by 'replace'.
Question 4.So perhaps the ____ question is who designs the tool.
Question 5.I'd ____ that screen time is less the issue than screen CONTEXT.
Question 6.That ____ , the most likely future is a hybrid.
Writing · Section 10
4 minPut it in writing
Your task
Plan (in 4 minutes) THREE reusable lines you can carry into any Part 3 discussion: ONE concession opener, ONE 'if anything' counter-move, ONE reframe sentence. Make them topic-neutral.
- • Three lines only — must be reusable.
- • Each line ≤ 15 words.
- • Test by inserting into TWO different topics.
Before you submit
- ☐ Concession opener: opens without weakening stance.
- ☐ 'If anything' counter-move: flips a concession back into support.
- ☐ Reframe sentence: visibly moves the conversation a level up.
- ☐ Each line works on at least two unrelated topics.
Write your answer here
Restoring…0 words
Show model answer
Concession: 'Granted, the counter-argument has weight — but it's narrower than it first looks.' If anything: 'If anything, that strengthens rather than weakens my case.' Reframe: 'So perhaps the deeper question isn't whether ___, but how we structure ___.'
Speaking · Section 11
6 minMake it a real conversation
Speaking P3 discussion — full sitting × 2 (5 minutes). FIRST sitting: teacher/partner asks 3 follow-up questions on education + technology. SECOND sitting: 3 follow-ups on competition for children. Each answer must hit all four moves by the 90-second mark. After each sitting, partner identifies which moves were missing.
After each sitting, tally which moves were visible. Aim 4/4 in answer 2.
Did every answer GROW past 30 seconds — or plateau?
All 4 moves, all answers
Band 5 shape — refine examples next.
Anchor + example only
Drill the concession move next sitting.
Concedes but doesn't reframe
Add the 'deeper question' line at the 60s mark.
Undermines own stance
Practise 'if anything' to flip the concession back.
Useful phrases
- I'd argue that ______ , primarily because ______.
- In my own experience, ______.
- Granted, ______ — but ______.
- If anything, ______ strengthens the case for ______.
- So perhaps the deeper question is ______.
- It depends what you mean by ______.
Your speaking notes
Restoring…Optional · Teacher-led
Teacher Activities
Stretches if time allows. All work 1:1. ~18 min total
Homework · Section 12
Take-homeTake it home
Record yourself answering 3 Part 3 discussion-style questions (90 seconds each). Listen back. For each answer, tag the four moves (or note which is missing). Re-record ONE.
Build a 10-item 'Part 3 discussion frame bank': 3 anchors, 3 concessions, 2 'if anything' flips, 2 reframes. Memorise all 10.
Finished? Reveal the answer key to self-check your work.
Write three 120-word Part 3 discussion 'mini-essays' using the four-move skeleton on three topics of your choice. Mark each move in the margin.
Find one opinion column online. Identify (a) its anchor, (b) its strongest concession, (c) its reframe (if any). Note one line you could BORROW into a Part 3 discussion answer next week.
Finished? Reveal the answer key to self-check your work.
Recap · Section 13
Wrap-upWhat you've learned
- Part 3 discussion marks RANGE within a single answer. Stance alone = ceiling.
- The skeleton: ANCHOR → EXEMPLIFY → CONCEDE → REFRAME. All four by 90 seconds.
- Concession DEEPENS the anchor — it doesn't cancel it. Use 'if anything' to flip back.
- Reframe with 'So perhaps the deeper question is…'.
- Never repeat under follow-up; always concede + redirect.
Extra Practice
Need more practice with this exam skill?
R&UoE P3 · Word Formation
Part 3 · Word formation
Multi-step derivations, negative prefixes, noun/adjective shifts
Practise this exam skill
Speaking P2 · Collaborative Task
Part 2 · Collaborative task prompts
Discussion stage then decision stage — negotiating, not taking turns
Practise this exam skill
Optional — this doesn't count towards lesson completion.