## Who we are

Ace is a unique TOEFL speaking prep service. Our goal is to build a lively community of English-learners who can share their test experiences and help each other to improve. Our realistic mock-tests and valuable feedback are sure to help you ace the TOEFL speaking test.

###### HIGH QUALITY MOCK-TESTS

Practice in a TOEFL like environment from our large and growing database.

###### SCORE AND FEEDBACK

Every submission is personally graded and checked by a teacher.

###### SHARING EXPERIENCE

Learn by listening to others and sharing your own submission.

###### REAL IMPROVEMENT

Gain confidence in your English fluency and TOEFL speaking score.

### With over 1000 users from more than 53 countries and regions, Ace helps you connect with English learners throughout the globe!

Here are the top 5 countries where our top English learners come from! (In %)

## Free TRIAL MOCK TESTSubmissions

User Date Region Mark Question Submission Feedback
MARIANA ARREGUIN CAMPOS
20 July 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

There is significant L1 interference with delivery and language so that not all words are clearly pronounced in this response, which, unfortunately, lowers the score, since the content is not completely clear. It is not clear if the speaker understands that “current events” refers specifically to news. She makes some salient points, including the idea that using the internet is “more independent than watching television…” but the continued detail, “If I am learning about….” Is not clear. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of speech so that every word is clearly enunciated.

Christian Kuczkowski
20 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

Overall this is a strong response with good details. Pacing and delivery are excellent and speech is very clear. Some sentences and vocabulary are imprecise, such as, “…some informations are not so trustful…” and while these do not significantly interfere with meaning, the lack of precision and use of non-standard vocabulary does lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and grammatical structures in order to keep the score at a 4.

jose rodriguez
19 July 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear from this response that the speaker understands that “current events” refers to news. The speaker does not choose one of the two options, or make a clear argument for one option or the other. Because no clear choice is made, the score cannot be higher than 2. It is very important, when given a response that requires the speaker to make and defend a choice, that the speaker do so. Part of the score is based on the ability to support a position. Be sure to speak in clear, concise sentences and work on the clarity of ideas, as there are portions of this response that are not completely clear, such as, “…but by watching television is another way and if you can find a lot of information if you know how to use it or which channels to see…”

MARIANA ARREGUIN CAMPOS
20 July 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and provides some relevant elaboration to support the choice. There is some interference from the speaker’s L1 accent that interferes with clarity of the response, so that not all details are clear, and listener effort is required. This is particularly noticeable in the sentence, “A few…parks that are very, very interesting…where you can….with animals…” The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of speech a bit to give herself the opportunity to more clearly enunciate each word.

Mateus Knabach Evald
20 July 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response. Delivery is clear, pronunciation is excellent, and the speaker uses a variety of sentence structures. The speaker names a location, Rio de Janeiro, orients the city geographically, by noting it is “located in the southeast part of the country,” and provides specific details, such as the city is, “Well known for beaches, carnival parties, and the Christ the Redeemer statue…” Well done!

Christian Kuczkowski
20 July 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is overall a very strong response. It clearly names a location and offers specific details in description. For example, the speaker notes that the location is a “beautiful beach,” and that “lots of people go there…from around the country and other countries.” He further elaborates that there are “a lot of bars and places to party.” There is some repetition throughout the response, as the speaker repeats some words or phrases, especially the word “beautiful.” While this does not detract from the score, because there are so many strong details, if the response were less elaborated, it would be a point of deduction.

Trideev Pal
19 July 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an interesting response in which the speaker clearly names a location and provides relevant elaboration. The location is the Taj Mahal. The speaker provides the geographical location and details about the history. Elaboration is detailed, with sentences such as, “The full moon and the white building….the white monument seems like the poet’s delight.”  Pacing is slow, but delivery is steady and not halting.

jose rodriguez
19 July 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and attempts some elaboration to explain why this is a place that is popular with visitors. Elaboration is general, but overall adequate, noting the beaches, and that the location is “not expensive.” Language is imprecise and marked by frequent grammatical errors in sentences such as, “It is a long place with beach and there’s too much things to do.” Because of the imprecise use of vocabulary and the pattern of grammatical errors, the score is 3. Some raters may consider this a “high” 2 score because of the grammar, so the speaker is encouraged to focus on use of verbs and singular/plural forms.

guilherme silva
14 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

This is overall a good response. However, there are several sentence errors in syntax and precision, leading to the need for listener effort to determine the speaker’s meaning. The speaker makes the point that he prefers to learn about current events through the internet because, “…actually, I don’t watch television anymore…” The elaboration is not completely clear, including sentences such as, “The news nowadays is being very depressing in my country, much bad news…the internet actually is much more source…more source…”  which leads to some confusion on the point he is making. The speaker is encouraged to focus a bit more before delivering his response, as it is clear he had relevant points to make, but struggled somewhat to organize them in the actual delivery of the response.

Crishalyn Lait
14 July 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question2-1

This speaker attempts to state a clear preference for the internet and adds some elaboration. Development is unclear at times, such as, “…because through the internet once it is cast through the television you can review it over the internet…” which seems to suggest that the internet offers an opportunity to see information from television – but that idea is not clearly stated. Pacing is somewhat slow with some repetition of “current events and issues…” and pauses between ideas. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity of ideas to improve her score.

eigo nochikara
13 July 2017 Japan 4 out of 4 Question2-1

Despite some minor lapses in precision, this is an excellent response that makes clear and relevant points. Delivery is very strong, using a range of sentence structures, adequate vocabulary, and good details. The speaker points out, for example, that the “Internet is more like a book; you can bookmark, and you can return when you are free…” There are some awkward sentence structures, such as “…and it is very much updated, too…” but these do not significantly detract or lower the score.

Joymay Jaramillo
13 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is an excellent response that uses a range of sentence structures and precise vocabulary to consider the nuances of both options. Sentences are very strong, such as, “On the other hand, if the viewers choose TV, it is also updated, but they have to wait for the scheduled time for it to be broadcasted…”  There is also excellent and precise vocabulary that demonstrates the speaker’s complete understanding of the prompt, such as, “However, some of these writers are biased…”  The single caution is that on some of the TOEFL prompts that offer a choice of two or three options, it is necessary to choose one of the options, and reviewing the benefits of all of the options can, in some cases, lead to a lower score.

guilherme silva
14 July 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response that clearly names a location and includes strong, specific details. The speaker identifies an island and elaborates by stating that the island includes “42 beaches,” he continues to add detail, distinguishing the beaches with information, such as, “…people who like to go to parties go to the north, where it is very crowded…” The pace is steady, although somewhat slow, and there are very minor grammatical errors, such as “There is 42 beaches,” rather than “There are” but these errors do not detract from the score.

Crishalyn Lait
14 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is a strong response with many relevant details. The speaker identifies an underground river as the tourist spots and elaborates by describing the cave formations and different kinds of fishes one can see there. She also points out rock formations. There are very minor grammatical errors and the pace is somewhat slow, but it does not detract from the score.

12 July 2017 Pakistan 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker takes a clear position that the best source for current events is the internet. He elaborates effectively, noting, “Everybody in today’s world is active in social media…” and explaining how one can become aware of a news story on social media, and independently “Google it” to learn more. He also elaborates on the “different opinions” available via the internet.   This response qualifies for the top score, although there are minor grammatical and sentence structure errors. The speaker is encouraged to continue to focus on these aspects to ensure a top score on the actual test.

phani garcia
12 July 2017 Mexico 0 out of 4 Question2-1

There is no sound until about half way through the response, at which point the speaker speaks briefly, but she is not speaking English

Eylem Yazıcı
11 July 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear that the speaker understands the prompt, or that the question refers to the best way to learn about the news, or current events, as she notes in her response, “You can find really good choice about events on the internet,” suggesting a reference to special events or activities. Elaboration is adequate, but delivery is uneven, and lacks complete sentences. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence and grammar structure on future attempts to improve her score.

laura tecozautla
11 July 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the prompt and responds by explaining why the internet is the best source for news or current events. Elaboration is adequate, but not always clear because of missing words and grammatical/syntax errors such as, “Also its bad the internet you can find wrong information…” To improve her score the speaker is encouraged to focus on speaking in complete sentences and paying close attention to grammar.

eigo nochikara
13 July 2017 Japan 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response that clearly names a location, orients the location geographically, and provides relevant and detailed elaboration. The speaker notes several specific reasons why visitors will enjoy Kyoto, including the “ancient temples and shrines” and the opportunity to “see a lot of people walking wearing their traditional kimono.”  Sentence structured is varied, and enunciation is clear, with few if any noticeable influences of the speaker’s primary language.

12 July 2017 Pakistan 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The name of the specific location is not clear, primarily because of microphone issues. The speaker refers to the location as “this place” throughout the response. Elaboration is excellent, including details such as “like paradise in nature” and “crystal clear waters, a range of summer activities…” Pronunciation is inconsistent, with some words very clearly enunciated, while others are influenced by the speaker’s primary language to the degree that the words are unclear. The speaker is encouraged to focus on consistent enunciation, slowing the pace of speech if necessary to ensure clarity.

Eylem Yazıcı
11 July 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location and attempts to provide some geographical information (…east side…). Elaboration is adequate, although somewhat general, and is delivered in fragments, rather than fully developed sentences such as, “Real hot place…its so popular because…sea is rea beautiful…” There is some repetition of ideas, “its so hot.” Pronunciation is strong and clarity of speech is excellent. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure and delivering clear and complete sentences.

laura tecozautla
11 July 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and provides information on its geography. There is excellent elaboration, as the speaker notes “the ocean…parties…hotels…Mexican culture…Mexican food.” Sentence structure is somewhat fragmented, and not all information is provided in complete or grammatical sentences. There are some word errors, such as “saftiest place.” These minor errors do not interfere with meaning, as pronunciation is excellent, but do lower the score related to mechanics.

Francyvania Franca
10 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

This is an adequate response that does not clearly indicate an understanding of the prompt or that the speaker knows that “current events” refers to news. Elaboration is very general, and is marked by repetition and some grammatical errors, such as, “On the internet you have every information you need…” or “Over the TV over television you don’t have that much access you don’t have that freedom.” The speaker should focus on precision in vocabulary and elaboration, as content as or “topic development” is as important as the mechanics of speech.

RJ Ambrocio
10 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is an excellent response, in which the speaker clearly understands the prompt and elaborates with clear and precise details. Pacing is excellent and pronunciation is very clear with little if any L1 influence. The speaker makes the nuanced point that on the internet it is difficult to “segregate the factual from the not-factual,” showing a range of vocabulary and full understanding of the issue. Well done.

Cheenee Mabelle Calantoc
9 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is an excellent response in which the speaker clearly understands the question and responds with clear and adequate elaboration. The pace of delivery is a bit slow, but the slower pace adds clarity to the response. The speaker should continue to practice speaking, perhaps increasing pace slightly with the same level of confidence. There are minor grammatical errors, primarily in singular/plural verb agreements, but these do not affect the score, given the additional strengths of the response.

riza ermiser
9 July 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the prompt and provides very relevant elaboration to support his choice of “internet” as the best source of current events. Pronunciation is clear. Delivery is halting, and grammar and sentence errors are frequent throughout the response, such as , “I think is the best way to learn about current events is through internet because you can change…you can use internet easy… you can stop…” The speaker should focus on sentence structure and grammar, specifically verb forms, as with those improvements, he could bring his score to a 4.

Mary Cabuslay
8 July 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question2-1

While the speaker clearly understands that “current events” refers to “news,” her refusal to choose either of the provided options (television or internet) has the potential to lower the score. When taking the actual test, if the prompt offers two or three options to choose from, it is imperative that you respond by choosing one of them, as choosing an option that is not provided can be considered a strategy test takers use when they don’t feel they can respond directly to the prompt. In this case the speaker provides elaboration on both the internet and television to explain her choice. Delivery is strong and elaboration is adequate. There are frequent grammatical and syntax errors, such as “Reading newspaper is much way better than watching television,” throughout the response that lower the score to 3.

doe john
8 July 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not respond with an understanding that “current events” refers to current news. The example used refers to researching World War II, and learning about the history of the war, which is not related to the topic. As the response is not directly related to the prompt, the highest score is 2.

Joymay Jaramillo
10 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an exemplary response that includes strong elaboration. After naming the location and providing some information about its geographical orientation, the speaker provides details in a variety of sentence structures, such as, “If you’re a big fan of scuba diving, snorkeling, and wanting to lie on the beach…”  or “Try swimming with the sharks for thirty minutes…”  This is clearly a top-scoring response.

Francyvania Franca
10 July 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and provides adequate elaboration clearly and using a variety of sentences with overall, appropriate grammar structure. Vocabulary is varied, so that there is little repetition, as she notes that tourists “enjoy very much the hot weather, the wind, the sea, the feeling that is near the shore.” Most raters would give this a top score of 4, but it is a bit short, so to ensure a top score when you take the actual test, consider how to further develop your ideas.

Gabriel Quaglia
10 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker successfully names his city and makes an effort to provide very specific and relevant elaboration. Pronunciation in English is strong, but it seems that the speaker is stumped at times by English vocabulary. Pacing is adequate and the speaker is able to use complete and varied sentences. To improve the score, continue to focus on developing vocabulary, which will provide a range of options for responses to the free-response questions like these.

Cheenee Mabelle Calantoc
9 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This exemplary response names a specific location and provides significant elaboration, including details about the local churches and the “uniqueness and story of each church,” as well as the “windmill farm” and beaches, as well as an excellent concluding sentence about the “friendly and kind people.” Delivery is appropriate, pronunciation is strong with only minor L1 influence, and the speaker uses a variety of sentence structures.

Nguyễn Thùy
9 July 2017 Viet Nam 0 out of 4 Question1-1

Unfortunately, because of issues with the microphone, the speaker’s response is not clear and cannot be assessed.

Atiar Faahd
9 July 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

There are some strong details in this response, which successfully names a tourist location and establishes its geographical location. The speaker should focus primarily on delivery, as the speech does not distinguish punctuation and has rising and falling intonations that are not associated with the sentences in the content, which means listener effort is required to understand what is being said. The delivery of speech is very rapid, so that some words are lost, or pronunciation is not clear. Slowing the speech, focusing on pronunciation, and considering how sentences start and end will improve the score.

Marcelo Hosoume
9 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Delivery and pacing are strong in this response which successfully names a location and locates it within a country. Elaboration is adequate, including details about a beach, a station, and that the city was the “place of the world soccer cup in the last years.” The syntax or grammatical sentence structure of the response falls below what is required for a top score, due to a pattern of minor errors and some words that are not completely discernible, such as a sentence that begins with “Famous…famous…?”  The speaker can improve his score by focusing on sentence structure and clear, precise pronunciation.

riza ermiser
9 July 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker successfully names a tourist site and notes the city in which it is located. Elaboration is very limited, both by content and by delivery, or the ability to clearly communicate ideas, as evidenced by this sentence, “It was built…built in 19…n beginning…in early 19…and its very crowded and it’s amazing…and that’s all I can say.”  The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary, in order to respond to a range of different questions.

Mary Cabuslay
8 July 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and provides some information about the geographical orientation.  She includes details about the water and beaches. There are some syntax errors that interfere with meaning, such as, “…if you check it out personally, personally, you will understand why many desires…to see the gorgeous area of it…” but the pace of speech is adequate and the pronunciation is generally clear.  The speaker should focus her efforts on the clarity of sentences to ensure her ideas and elaboration are communicated.

cleiton matos
7 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

Pronunciation and delivery are strong in this response, and the speaker uses clear and complete sentences. Elaboration is adequate, and the speaker makes the main point that the internet is superior because users can “pick up the event that you want to know.”  Vocabulary and grammatical structure are limited, with the repetition of the word “things,” and errors in every sentence.

Dayane Silvestre
7 July 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker seems to understand the question and has selected the internet as the best source of current events. Delivery and elaboration are limited, primarily but clarity of the grammar and syntax, such as, “…and sometimes watching television is good because they talking…” which is not clearly meaningful. The key points made were that one has to “filter” when using the internet and that television can exaggerate.

Veronica Morfin
7 July 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not completely clear that the speaker understands the topic. She selects television as the best way, elaborating that there is a “Choice …to…se…more about…the ?  …that is happening…” and that there will be “more people talking about...that is happening…” The main distinction made is that one must read on the internet but can watch and listen to television. The speaker is encouraged to establish the main point of her response clearly, to speak at a steady pace and to enunciate all words as clearly as possible.

mario santamaria
7 July 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not respond directly to the prompt and seems to be responding based on the idea of “learning” in a general sense, rather than the topic, which is “learning about current events,” meaning news stories. The reference to a “kid” and that “it is better to learn by television because cartoons are more associated with you…” is not related to the topic. Because the response is not directly on topic, it cannot get a score higher than 2.

vijay kumar
7 July 2017 India 0 out of 4 Question2-1

Unfortunately, the microphone quality, ambient noise, and the rapid speech at a very low volume make it impossible to discern what the speaker is saying or to provide a score.

RJ Ambrocio
8 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an exemplary response, notable for the clarity of speech, varied sentence structure, and strong organization. The speaker orients the response, the elaborates on a specific location. Precise details include, “diamond-like white sand,” and “clear water and a lot of wonderful resorts.” Well done.

doe john
8 July 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly identifies a location and provides some relevant elaboration. She notes that the region is “the former…one of the seven wonders of the world” and notes the color of the water and the friendliness of the local people. There are grammatical errors and syntax or sentence errors throughout the response, some of which interfere with meaning, such as, “People out there are friendly and very hospitable in the tourists…?” The speaker is encouraged to focus on grammar and to speak very clearly at an even pace.

cleiton matos
7 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and clearly elaborates with precise details, including mentioning beaches, that Rio was once the capital, and that the people are very friendly. Pronunciation is adequate and delivery is strong. There are minor and significant grammatical errors throughout the response, including verb errors, such as “once the capital…now it doesn’t anymore” and “people is very friendly.” These errors lower the overall score.

fatima martin
7 July 2017 Spain 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names and elaborates on a specific city with clear and specific details. Delivery and pronunciation are excellent and the degree of elaboration and vocabulary are exemplary. The speaker includes precise, specific information, including noting that the city is important in history, “from the Barbarians to Romans to…”  This is a top-scoring response.

Dayane Silvestre
7 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location, but elaboration is very limited. The speaker notes that there is a beach, but additional elaboration includes only generalizations, such as “there are many thing to see….” And “people like the weather and the beauty…”  The speaker is encouraged to focus on elaboration. The earn the top score all aspects of the response, including topic development, must be in the top-scoring range.

Cherry Pie Dela Cruz
7 July 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific beach and includes some details about the area, including “good food…reasonable prices…” Not all words are clearly discernible, and it seems that the speaker is listing details, but not using complete sentences. There are some grammatical errors, such as, “Everything are here…”  The speaker should focus on speaking in complete sentences and consider grammar.

Veronica Morfin
7 July 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location and provides some clear elaboration on the location, including the detail that there are “a lot of places, ecological places, and a lot of flowers.” Some aspects of the response of unclear because of the effect of the speaker’s first-language and because she speaks very rapidly. To raise the score, the speaker is encouraged to focus on clear enunciation of every word and to slow the pace of her speech.

natalia braga
7 July 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location, which is a river, and elaborates with some specific details about the region, including that it is a “big place, a bridge that pass a river.” Some sentences are imprecise because of grammatical/structural errors such as, “There’s a lot of people because they like to go there and see the waters they come from the most high part of the river and to eat some fish because the restaurants…” The speaker is encouraged to focus on grammar and delivery to raise her score. -

vijay kumar
7 July 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Unfortunately, the microphone quality and rapid, quiet delivery of the response made some aspects of the response unclear or indiscernible. The speaker names a specific location. Elaboration is not clear. It is not clear where sentences begin or end, and there is no sense of punctuation from the delivery of the response. The speaker is strongly encouraged to slow the pace of his speech and to clearly enunciate every word, being aware that the rater must hear words clearly in order to attribute credit for the content of the response.

Kahsoon Ngooi
6 July 2017 Malaysia 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly identifies the internet as the best source of current events. Speech is generally clear, although some words or phrases are not discernible, such as the sentence beginning, “the …?...of very famous newspaper publisher…??”  There minor and significant grammatical errors throughout the response, such as the sentence, “First the internet update very fast just about in a second…” this sentence is not clearly meaningful and includes noun/verb usage errors as well as a missing preposition. Because of the lack of clarity in and significant errors, the score is 2.

Hugo Nolasco
6 July 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question2-1

Speech and development are adequate in this response. The speaker chooses the internet as the best option for learning about current events and elaborates by noting that you “can check other source and go deeper in your research” as the main reason. He also provides a contrast, “On the TV  you have the option to watch the news once.” There are minor errors and repetitions, but overall this qualifies as a 4 score, although any additional grammatical errors would lower the score.

Kahsoon Ngooi
6 July 2017 Malaysia 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names New York City in the United States as a place in his country for visitors. Speech is very rapid and, as a result, not all words are clearly discernible. There is adequate elaboration, as the speaker notes “famous building” and “Statue of Liberty.” There are grammatical errors throughout the response, such as “First there are a famous building in New York City,” which includes a noun/verb error and a singular/plural error. The noun/verb error is considered a significant error and the singular/plural a minor error. Some sentences are not clearly meaningful because of word usage errors, such as, “Many visitors may be interesting….”  The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and  grammatical structures to improve his score.

Hugo Nolasco
6 July 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s delivery is clear and pronunciation is generally adequate. It is not immediately clear what city he is describing, but eventually it becomes clear. Some words are not clear, interfering with meaning, such as the phrase, “happy and receptable people…” which does not have a clear meaning. There are grammatical errors throughout, some of which interfere with topic development and with the fluidity of delivery. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary, grammar, and clarity of development.

heidi gomes
5 July 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker offers interesting elaboration and clearly names a specific city. She develops the topic by referring to “Carnival”  and “wonderful beaches.”  Delivery is somewhat halting, but not to the degree to interfere with meaning. There are several grammatical errors, such as, “There is also some wonderful beaches and sun shines all over the year,” which includes a noun/verb agreement error as well as a preposition usage error, both of which are considered “significant” errors on the test, and reduce the score. This is a 3. To improve her score the speaker should focus on grammatical structures and fluidity of her response.

Maria Santos
5 July 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Although elaboration is limited, this response is notable for exemplary pronunciation and vocabulary. The speaker notes a specific location, the Mayan Pyramids, and locates it geographically. She goes on to elaborate briefly that it is an “archeological site,” using strong, precise vocabulary. There is repetition of the word “amazing” and there not clear connections between ideas, moving from the pyramids being “one of the seven wonders of the world” to repeating that they are “really popular.” In the actual test ta top scoring response must be in the top range in all rubric areas, including “topic development.” This response would fall short in TD and would likely earn a 3. The speaker is encouraged to try to focus on adding more details and connecting those details when responding to this type of prompt.

Joy May Jaramillo
5 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker’s delivery is very clear and pronunciation is excellent. Range of vocabulary is also excellent with sentences such as, “We can get a lot of different articles pertaining to a certain topic…” Elaboration is somewhat limited, and there are pauses that interrupt sentences. It seems that the speaker was trying to think of what to say, rather than thinking of how to say something. This is a “low” 4 because of the limited elaboration. In some cases it might be scored a 3 because the topic is not fully developed. The speaker is encouraged to focus on development. Try to jot down notes before the recording starts so that you can maintain a sustained, developed response.

Ivanely Ricardi
3 July 2017 Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic Of 3 out of 4 Question2-1

This response is very well elaborated. The speaker determines that the internet is the best way to learn about current events, and she elaborates by noting that you can “search topics in the news like disasters, accidents…” She also notes that you “have the benefit to sit any time any place what you want to read..” There are minor grammatical errors throughout the response which lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to focus on grammatical structure, specifically verb forms.

Joy May Jaramillo
4 July 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This response is marked by excellent pronunciation and clarity of delivery. The speaker clearly names a location and elaborates adequately, including details such as, “…surfing, island hopping, and they can try local food, like ceviche, grilled fish, and many more…” Delivery is somewhat slow, but adequate, and there is a variety of sentence structures, demonstrating ability with syntax. There are brief pauses, but they do not interfere with meaning.

Sarah Mae Hayhurst
4 July 2017 Philippines 0 out of 4 Question1-1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coron,_Palawan

Keep in mind that reading a prepared response on the actual test will result in a failing score. Raters are trained to listen for responses that sound like the speaker is reading, rather than responding to a prompt.

Neslihan Nese
4 July 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker identifies Istanbul as a popular destination in Turkey. Delivery is halting, with pauses mid-sentence and filler sounds, which interrupt complete sentences. Some sentences are incomplete or repetitive, such as, “…popular because it has a huge heritage it has a huge cultural heritage…” There is some adequate development, about the sea views and a bridge. The hesitations and repetition lower the score.

Ivanely Ricardi
3 July 2017 Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic Of 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location and provides geographical orientation. Pacing is halting, and there are filler sounds, as the speaker seems to search for vocabulary. There are some issues with pronunciation, some of which are minor, such as “nor” for “north,” but others obscure meaning, so that it is not clear what the speaker intends to say. Syntax is inconsistent, with some complete sentences, and some sentences that are incomplete, such as “…can be…great…for the visitors…enjoy it…” The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary development and sentence construction for future attempts.

kemal sicim
2 July 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly identifies his preference for the internet to access current events. However, there is a lack of clarity throughout the response, which makes it difficult to determine the reasons he shares. For example, he notes that on the internet there are “Lots of options,” and on television, “Options are….”  It is not clear if he makes the distinction that current events refers to news, or what channels on the television he refers to. Because much of the response cannot be discerned because of its rapid, unclear delivery, the score is 2. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of delivery and clearly enunciate every word.

kemal sicim
2 July 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and has detailed elaboration, including mentioning the “five star and six star hotels…” and “places for both young kids and adults…” Not all words are discernible in the response, as the speaker’s pace is very rapid at times, and very deliberate at other times. There are pauses that interrupt the fluidity of sentences. The unclear words and uneven pacing lower the score of an otherwise strong response.

Sherlyn Claros
29 June 2017 Pitcairn 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker successfully names a location and provides some elaboration. Details are very general, and do not orient the listener to a specific location. Vocabulary is adequate, including details such as “white sand beaches” and “hidden beauty,” which demonstrate a range of understanding. There are some minor vocabulary errors, such as “snorkels” rather than “snorkel” (a verb form error) and “do kayaking” rather than “kayak” (a verb form error).

gülşah yıldız
26 June 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the prompt and offers strong reasons to support her choice as the internet for the best source of current events. She notes that the internet is not limited to a few channels and offers the opportunity to connect to several newspapers and other channels and people. The pacing and delivery of the response is halting and there is a pattern of minor, but frequent errors, such as “Get all information…easier…than watching television…” and “Lots of different sources in internet…”  and “Not limited by few channel…” which include minor errors in singular/plural usage, missing articles, and missing words in the responses because of pauses. The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery and pacing. Try to avoid filler sounds and slow the pace of speech to make the flow seem more deliberate.

Simone Dias
26 June 2017 Portugal 4 out of 4 Question1-1

Overall this is a very strong response. There is one major error at the start of the response in which the speaker says, “A place in my country that is very popular between tourists is downtown Lisbon…” misusing the preposition “between.” Preposition errors such as this are generally considered major errors. However, in this case pronunciation, elaboration, and pacing are very strong, and most raters would likely give this response a top score of 4 despite the error. The speaker is encouraged to review preposition usage, however, to ensure she does not make such an error on the actual test.

gülşah yıldız
26 June 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker successfully names a location and provides some geographical information. Elaboration is limited, as the speaker notes that the city “Has sea and lots of trees” as well as “sculptures” and that it is “so cultural and historical too.” There is repetition of the phrase “sea and lots of trees” and some awkward grammatical structure in the repeated sentence “deserves to see by visitors and tourists.” Because of the limited elaboration and issues with repetition and grammatical errors the score is 3.

21 June 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly chooses the internet as the best source of current events. The central point of her argument is that the internet offers recorded video of events made by people who witness it, as opposed to “just what TV wants to show you.” Delivery is halting, and there are pauses within sentences. There are frequent grammatical errors throughout the response, such as, “Whatever it is…it is like you have saw the event through the eyes of many many peoples…” This type of error includes a verb error and a singular/plural error, which results in lowering the score. The speaker has a good range of vocabulary, so should focus on delivery and grammatical structure to improve her score.

jose rodriguez
20 June 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response includes some strong elaboration, including details on the importance of identifying reliable sources of current events on the internet. Delivery is adequate, but halting at times. The speaker attempts a comparison/contrast with television, but the point made is not completely clear with the sentence, referring to television, “…the information there is not actually…it is shorter…” Since the speaker had previously referred to the credibility of information, it is not clear if this is also a comment on credibility. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence clarity and make clear and precise points.

Ece Yildirim
20 June 2017 Turkey 4 out of 4 Question2-1

Overall, this is a very strong response with a well-developed argument supporting the internet as the better source of current events. The speaker uses strong and precise vocabulary, such as, “You will get a wider perspective of what is happening in the world.” Delivery is fluid and sentence structure is generally clear and correct. There is one incorrect usage repeated in the response, referring to video on the internet, “which covers for what the television does…” but this is not significant to the degree to lower the score.

vv vv
19 June 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the question and makes several comparisons between television and the internet to support her argument that the internet is the best way to access current events. She notes, for example, that one has to change channels and wait to see events on television, rather than accessing events anytime on a smartphone via an app. Delivery is fluid and pronunciation is clear. Elaboration is strong and the comparison is effective.

Luigina Tellez
19 June 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear that the speaker completely understood the question or that “current events” refers to news. Her comment that the internet is effective when one “has a doubt” and a good option to “ease an answer or the history that helps you understand better,” is not clearly related to the response. The further elaboration on the coming third world war seems unclear or peripheral to the topic. In order to earn a score higher than 2 on a comparison question the speaker must demonstrate understanding of the question and make a clear comparison between the two options.

21 June 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker offers excellent elaboration about the construction of the pyramids described in her response. Delivery is adequate but halting at times, such as, “…made…made…one on top of the other…” and missing words to complete sentences. There are minor grammatical errors throughout as well as the minor repetitions, which lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery and grammar as combined with strong elaboration, these improvements will bring her score to the top scoring range.

jose rodriguez
20 June 2017 Mexico 4 out of 4 Question1-1

Although elaboration of this response is not exceptional, delivery is fluid and pronunciation is excellent. The speaker’s grammar is automatic and the details provided are adequate. The lack of elaboration is likely related to the subject, and not the speaker’s lack of adequate vocabulary, as he does not seem to “search” for the correct words. He includes several examples of activities that can be pursued in the park, and uses descriptive language to describe the experience of visiting. The score is 4.

Ece Yildirim
19 June 2017 Turkey 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response that includes clear and specific details. Delivery is fluid and automatic. The speaker includes interesting and specific details about Turkish food, historical background of the city, and interesting sights within the city. There are no grammatical errors and the only pronunciation error is minor and does not interfere with meaning. Clearly a top-scoring response. Well done.

vv vv
19 June 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location and explains where it is geographically within the country. Delivery is adequate, but there are pauses that interrupt sentences. Overall pronunciation is adequate, with the exception of a few words, such as “magnificent.” Frequent grammatical errors include significant errors in verb use, such as “…which was being…” and in singular/plural formation, “…one of the most amazing place in India.” The speaker is encouraged to focus on grammar to improve her score, as grammatical errors are the source of deductions.

Luigina Tellez
19 June 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly identifies a location and she effectively explains its geographical location within Mexico. Delivery is relatively fluid with few hesitations and pronunciation is clear. There are frequent grammatical errors, some of which are considered significant, such as errors in preposition use, like, “…is very popular in American citizens,” and verb errors, “…they has a really good time.” There is also some repetition of phrases “a really good time,” which suggests limits in vocabulary. The speaker is encouraged to focus on grammar and vocabulary for elaboration in order to improve her score.

Júlia Bussab Fonseca
19 June 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The response includes strong elaboration, with details about beaches, samba, and beaches. Delivery is adequate with few hesitations. There are some repetitions and corrections, such as “A lot of tourist..touristic points…” but these do not significantly interfere with meaning. There are minor grammatical errors and some awkward syntax, but overall this is a very competent response that would be considered a “low” four score. Should the syntax errors become more pronounced, or if the grammatical errors included verb errors, the score would be lower.

wael elsehly
18 June 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not seem to be clear in understanding that “current events” refers to news, as he notes that it is easier to follow an event and “check prices” on the internet. He notes several key differences between retrieving information from the internet versus television, including the convenience of “Googling” information when one wants it. Because the speaker’s understanding of the topic is unclear, the score is 2.5.

wael elsehly
18 June 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker delivers the description of the pyramids fluidly and confidently with strong elaboration. He notes theories on the construction and elaborates with details about the location. There are frequent, minor grammatical and syntax errors, such as, “Tourists like to go there to see themselves this wonderland,” which do not detract from meaning, but are so frequent as to lower the score.

Alex Kitamura
14 June 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly determines a preference – the internet and elaborates with some details. Some of the details are imprecise, making it difficult to completely understand the argument. For example, he says, “Better way to learn is the internet,” which suggests he is talking about studying, rather than learning about current events. He refers to “aggressive content” on television without elaboration, but does make the relevant point that internet users have an “obligation” to “filter” the results they find online. The frequent grammatical errors lower the score, despite the strong details and elaboration.

Lekaa Elmesilhy
13 June 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The audio quality on the response is poor, so it is not possible to clearly discern all of what the speaker is saying. However, she does state that she prefers the internet. The speaker does not clearly indicate an understanding that “current events” refers to news, as she refers to studying and teachers, which are not related to accessing news. Because of this misunderstanding of the topic, the score cannot be greater than 2.

Abdikarim Osman
13 June 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response includes some clear and relevant details. Some information seems confused or imprecise, such as the opening sentence, “Most important thing about current events is internet.” However, the speaker does make a clear argument that accessing current events through the internet is “most efficient” because the internet is more available via mobile phones. Delivery is generally fluid and intonation is clear. There are some errors in grammar and word use, but they do not significantly interfere with meaning.

luiz junior
14 June 2017 United States 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker chooses a specific location. Delivery is halting and elaboration is limited. The elaboration is somewhat limited, as the speaker mentions mainly that the cities “have many places to go” and names specific locations but does not elaborate. There are frequent grammatical errors and imprecise language, such as “Many wonderful…to go to enjoy…”  Because of the limits in elaboration and frequent errors that interfere with meaning, the score is 2.

Alex Kitamura
14 June 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s delivery is very clear and fluid. He offers excellent specific details within a framing device (first, next, etc). There are some errors in the use of transitional words, such as using “meanwhile” to transition to describing a restaurant, which is not an appropriate transition. There are also several singular/plural errors in which the speaker does not use the “s” to signify a plural word (one of the oldest building…) These errors lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to pay special attention to transitional words and prepositions as these errors tend to be considered more significant in scoring.

Fernando Jimenez
14 June 2017 Mexico 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker offers excellent specific details in this response. He names a specific location, identifies its geographical location and elaborates with strong details, including describing the weather, the food, and activities, like fishing. He goes into excellent detail when describing a specific dish made with “meat and a spicy sauce.” The delivery is halting at times, but overall is adequate. This is clear 4 response.

Lekaa Elmesilhy
13 June 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Unfortunately, the audio on this response was not clear. Based on what is audible, the speaker names a location and uses a framing device (first of all, secondly) to organize her response. There are some grammatical errors in the response (find all kind people…) and some vocabulary is not clearly stated. Delivery is halting at times, but generally adequate. If this were the actual assessment, this response would likely be marked for technical difficulties and rejected from scoring.

Abdikarim Osman
13 June 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker does not name a specific location, but offers elaboration on why the place he is describing is popular with visitors. He includes some strong details including “good sand dunes” and “cheap hotels.” Delivery is somewhat halting and there is some repetition, such as “Com back, swim…and swim..” The speaker is encouraged to focus on speaking in complete sentences and grammatical structures to ensure the clarity of his ideas.

Isabella Marques
13 June 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s delivery is excellent. Speech is very fluid and there is a variety of sentence structures. Elaboration is somewhat limited, but that may be from preparation, and not reflective of vocabulary. The speaker elaborates on a specific attraction and uses some precise language (post cards, beautiful beaches, etc). There is some repetition, especially of the word “beaches,” which limits the discussion, however, the strengths of the response allow a score of 4 based on the entire rubric.

priscila vitorino
12 June 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question1-1

There is a clear identification of a location in this response and some attempt to elaborate. The elaboration is limited, primarily because of vocabulary. Not speaker notes that the city is a good place visit because of “…beaches…other places.” There are some language/grammar errors that result in errors in meaning such as, “…people is much kind and grateful…”    Because of errors in grammar and vocabulary, the sore is 2.

Dominic Eagle
9 June 2017 Mexico 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is an excellent response that demonstrates a strong, fluent control of language including informal and idiomatic phrasing. The speaker understands that “current events” refers to the news and elaborates with relevant and meaningful details, explaining the convenience of reading the news on his phone when he is “on the street.” He refers to watching TV in his “Free time,” and that he enjoys reading the comments on news stories, all details that reflect complete understanding and an ability to discuss the topic with complete competence. Well done.

Juan Carlos Pérez Sánchez
11 June 2017 Mexico 1 out of 4 Question1-1

The response is exceptionally limited with a single phrase stated. This phrase is not a clear or precise sentence that directly response to the prompt: “Moralia….is …a ….place…beautiful…with…a …very…tree…”  The response receives a score of 1, as any response in which the speaker speaks in English will receive at least a score of 1.

jibril zarif
9 June 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker effectively describes the geographical location of the city within the country. The response lacks fluidity as there are many pauses and hesitations and pacing is quite slow. Elaboration is limited, mentioning the city’s “natural resources and its people,” which does not provide specific information about the location. Some sentences are imprecise, reflecting a lack of range in vocabulary, such as, “…different varieties…for the tourists like.” The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery and on vocabulary in order to improve the range of detail and elaboration in responses.

masoud nasiry
7 June 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s delivery is very clear. However, the pacing is quite slow, and there is considerable repetition, which limit the amount of elaboration in the response. For example, he repeats the name of the city, Kabul, multiple times before expanding into the description of the city. The speaker is encouraged to practice speaking more quickly and to speak through errors, rather than stopping and repeating words that you may believe you’ve misspoken.

Dominic Eagle
6 June 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question1-1

There were some issues of clarity at the start of the response, which made it difficult to immediately understand what location the speaker was describing. Eventually it became clear that he was describing beaches in general, but not a specific location. The response is marked by pauses and hesitations, as well as some repetition of sounds. Some sentences are imprecise, such as, “saw a lot of people…a lot of countries…I think that…” The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary, as it seemed that he did not have the vocabulary to make the points he sought to make in his explanation.

Sergio Garcia
5 June 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Delivery in this response is sustained, with few long pauses. There are pronunciation errors, where first language interferes with clarity of words in English, such as “it” for “eat,” making it difficult to understand the response in its entirety. Sentences tend to be choppy, so that there is no clear reflection of punctuation. Elaboration is adequate, but content is somewhat basic (play some games); The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure and on vocabulary.

Denis Lessa da Silva
3 June 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker’s response demonstrates a clear understanding of the prompt and an ability to respond in a generally accurate way. He uses an effective framing device (two reasons) to organize his response, showing some planning of the information. Elaboration is very general, and lacks precision of vocabulary or specific ideas. Vocabulary and information is, at times, very imprecise, leading to confused sentences such as, “we can choose for which company and which newspaper you would like to have the information.”

Olivia Yu
3 June 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question2-1

This response is distinguished by very strong details and elaboration. The speaker clearly understands that “current events” refers to news. She chooses the internet as the best way to learn about current events and uses an effective framing device (two reasons) to organize her response. The speaker repeats and corrects herself several times throughout the response (if I want to get…to listen to the news…) which significantly interferes with delivery and, at times results in minor grammatical errors. Elaboration is strong and pronunciation is overall very good

Denis Lessa da Silva
3 June 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The strength of this response is the speaker’s enthusiasm about the location. The speaker uses a strong framing device (the first reason…the second reason) which shows good organization. Pacing is adequate, but the delivery is not fluid, as there are pauses between words and filler sounds (uh, um) that interrupt. There are some minor pronunciation/word errors such as, “sonic…view…” but vocabulary is generally strong.

Clarissa Schitine
29 May 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker is clear in identifying a location for the topic of the response. Elaboration is somewhat limited. She describes the city as “nice, beautiful, and very, very nice” but does not provide specific details about the sights or attractions. There are minor grammatical errors, including missing words, such as, “it is the city I live…” which are distracting, but do not interfere with meaning. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary to improve elaboration on future attempts.

Olivia Yu
29 May 2017 United States 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response distinguished by above average vocabulary that shows great precision. For example, the speaker described a “very long river that cuts through gorges and cliffs” at the location, showing not only knowledge of different geographical features, but also figurative language. Delivery is fluid, and grammatical structures are automatic. There is a variety of sentence structures.

Alondra Alcala
25 May 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker has strong vocabulary, including specific terms such as “culture and traditions.” Sentence development is  imprecise, with some awkward structures, such as, “show the beauty of the country and history,” or “transmits history.”  Delivery is relatively fluid, with few pauses or interruptions. The speaker is encouraged to focus on  sentence structure to improve her score on future attempts.

Ricardo Chrisi
23 May 2017 Spain 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses the internet. Not all development is audible because of microphone issues, unfortunately. The speaker says, “…because in the past couple of the years…using..? has been …?” However, he also elaborates about social media and communicating with friends and attending events, which demonstrates a lack of understanding of the prompt and the concept that “current events” refers to news, and not to social events. Unfortunately, because of lost details and this misunderstanding, the score cannot be higher than 2.

mehmet bitiren
22 May 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses the internet, “…I think using the internet about learning current events is the best way…” There is some elaboration, primarily that there are more sources on the internet than television. There is some strong vocabulary (internet is much more objective); delivery is halting and there is some repetition, so the delivery is the weakest aspect of the response. The speaker is encouraged to focus on speaking in complete sentences with as few pauses and repetitions as possible in order to raise his score.

sabir sabiri
22 May 2017 Afghanistan 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds by selecting the internet. He uses a helpful framework (two reasons); There is some elaboration (many sources, connect with others); Elaboration is not precise (…you can contact with other group…with a group of people…); there is repetition of ideas that interferes with fluidity of delivery and makes it difficult for the speaker to fully develop the response. The speaker is encouraged to avoid such repetition. If you perceive an error, try to continue rather than stop and correct.

Ricardo Chrisi
23 May 2017 Spain 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location. Elaboration is adequate. Delivery is halting with some repetition and incomplete sentences, such as, “people like to see…like to have their summer vocations….” The speaker describes the amenities of the location, but there is a lack of precision and some confusion, “think about…be in the sea…and enjoy your summer,” that interfere with meaning.

mehmet bitiren
22 May 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt and names a specific location. Elaboration is strong, especially with geographical details. There are some pauses that interfere with fluidity and some minor grammatical errors (is very attracted by tourists) that prevent a top score.

Umut Ercan
20 May 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and chooses the internet. He elaborates by explaining that the internet is faster. Pronunciation is adequate; there are some pauses between ideas, which interrupts fluidity of delivery. There are some minor mechanical errors, such as adding an “s” to information for a plural, and missing articles, which lower the score to 3.

Raul Acuña
22 May 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location. He elaborates by naming specific activities and attractions. Vocabulary and elaboration are adequate (go to many places to dance, have a great dinner with your family…). There are some pauses and missing words (go with them…many…?); The response is not sustained to the end, which drops the score from what would have been a 4. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence variety and vocabulary in order to maintain sustained, strong sentences.

Izabel Cvetkovic
18 May 2017 Serbia 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the prompt. She determines that TV is the best way to learn about current events and elaborates by explaining that “incorrect informations have gotten to the internet…” this minor grammar error is repeated throughout the response. There are some pauses/hesitations between ideas and elaboration is somewhat limited/confusing, such as “there is less sources on television and this is another reason why it might be more correct.” The speaker is encouraged to review vocabulary, especially some of the trickier words, like information, that do not take an “s” or plural verb form, as subject/verb errors automatically lower one’s score.

Izabel Cvetkovic
18 May 2017 Serbia 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Speech is very clear and pronunciation is excellent. There are minor pauses between ideas, but vocabulary is excellent. Elaboration is very good (fortress high above building gives phenomenal view and perspective…); the response is fluid and automatic and there are no grammatical errors that interfere or distract from meaning. An excellent response.

princess A
17 May 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. She describes a beach. There are minor grammar errors such as, “It is a beach tourists are visiting…a serenely place…” Elaboration is very general, with no specific details (very nice…serene…clear water); speech is clear and response is relatively fluid with only brief pauses. Sentence structure is basic. The speaker is encouraged to focus on elaboration and details and on varying sentence structure as well as grammatical structures.

Thái Bội Ngọc
15 May 2017 Viet Nam 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. She uses an effective framing device (two reasons); vocabulary is strong (reliable and immediate news sources); there is some repetition of words. Elaboration is adequate. There are frequent grammatical errors, including subject/verb errors (there is a lot of…articles…). Because the vocabulary is strong, the score is three, despite the frequent grammar errors.

Umut Ercan
12 May 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names “Istanbul” in the opening statement, but it sounds like he is naming the “most livable city,” which is not directly responsive to the prompt. The speaker uses an effective framing device, “for two reasons…”  There are frequent grammar and vocabulary errors, such as, “many things in happening in there for example events or tournaments is …happening…or creating in there…” which is not a clearly meaningful statement. The elaboration is mostly unclear and it is not clear that the speaker understands the prompt. As a result of these errors and the perceived confusing, the score is 2.

Thái Bội Ngọc
11 May 2017 Viet Nam 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a specific location and identifies its geographic location. She elaborates to explain that it is a UNESCO world heritage site. There are pronunciation errors that interfere with clarity and require listener effort, such as, “scenic spot?” There are minor grammatical errors throughout, primarily with singular/plurals (not using the “s” sound at the end of a plural). Elaboration is adequate and the response is relatively fluid.

Ogulcan Bozkurt
6 May 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses the internet as the best way to learn about current events. There are minor grammatical errors as the speaker notes that the internet is “more faster” and “more quicker” than watching television. He elaborates by noting that one can “read many articles in same time” as a contrast to television. He also elaborates with an example of a car accident and the depth of detail that would be available on the internet. Because of the frequency of grammatical errors, the score is 3.

Ogulcan Bozkurt
6 May 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and identifies the geographical location. He elaborates by naming foods and vaguely referring to “so many places” and “good moments.” Elaboration is very general, save for the mention of two specific monuments. There are minor grammatical errors. To reach the top score, elaboration should be very specific. Name a specific sigh-seeing or natural location, and describe it with details.

4 May 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses a position: the internet. He elaborates with details that there is a lot of information and that it is free. He contrasts with the limitations of television. He also notes that the internet offers the opportunity access the information we want, rather than waiting for information on television. Delivery is fluid and clear and elaboration is adequate. Sentence structure is varied and the speaker clearly contrasts the two options. A very strong response.

Honey Margarette Ciano
3 May 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not choose a position; rather, she says both. Since the question asks for the “best” way to learn about current events, it requires making an argument. There is considerable ambient noise interfering with her delivery. Since she does not take a stance, she is unable to fulfill the requirements of the task and the score cannot be higher than 2. Keep in mind that any task that asks you to choose one option requires making that choice and there will be a penalty for not making and supporting a choice and contrasting it with the option you did not choose.

4 May 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location. He elaborates by describing the geographical location with precise information. He then goes on to explain why it is popular with tourists. There are some awkward sentences, “snowing is rather rare in India….” And there are one or two words that are not clearly enunciated.  Overall a very strong response. This is a “low” 4. Some raters might consider it a “high” 3, so the speaker is encouraged to focus on grammatical structure and clarity.

ankit j
4 May 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location. Speech is rapid and intonation is poor so that listener effort is required to discern the speaker’s sentences. There are pauses mid-sentence and some repetition that interrupts fluidity of delivery. Some words cannot be determined because of the repetition and lack of clarity in speech. The speaker is encouraged to slow his speech and clearly pronounce each word.

Honey Margarette Ciano
3 May 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly identifies a location.  She elaborates by noting scenery, hospitable people, and “foods.” Elaboration is relatively general and the response includes long pauses. Vocabulary is adequate, but not precise or detailed, as there are no specifics about the location. Because of the pauses and lack of specific elaboration, the score is 3.

suneha kumari
1 May 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker identifies the internet as the best way to learn about current events. She elaborates on social media sites where one can learn about news. There are minor grammar errors (so many news); She seems to confuse news with events in peoples’ lives, however. The comparison to TV is limited in elaboration. Diction and pacing are adequate.

Charmie Ramos
1 May 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker identifies the internet as the best way to learn about current events. Vocabulary is excellent (millennial age); Elaboration is limited, however, as this is a very brief response and there is no comparison made to television. Because the speaker does not make a comparison and because the response is very brief, although well spoken, the score is 2.

César Jesús Pérez Vázquez
1 May 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states that the internet is more effective because there is more content for preparing oneself for exams. It is not clear that he understands that “current events” refers to news, as he elaborates on topics such as grammar and speaking, which are not related to current events. Because the speaker has not understood or responded to the topic of the prompt, the score cannot be higher than 2.

tsering topden
30 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker establishes that the internet is the best way to learn about current events. He elaborates that there are limited channels on TV, while the internet is unlimited. He also notes that TV is sometimes censored. Delivery is somewhat halting, but pronunciation is adequate.

suneha kumari
1 May 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. She names a specific location. There is some repetition of ideas, such as, “…is a very beautiful place…it contains natures beauty…” which shows limits in elaboration. There are pauses between ideas and some minor grammatical errors, “…every people’s dream is to visit…” Because of the repetition, limited elaboration, and minor but frequent errors, the score is 2.

Charmie Ramos
1 May 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly responds to the prompt and names a location. She elaborates by describing the beach and specific activities. She describes the types of people who visit and when they visit. Pacing is adequate, if a bit slow, and pronunciation is excellent. There is a variety of sentence structures. The speaker may consider speaker a bit more rapidly in order to include more details, but this is a top-scoring response as it stands.

César Jesús Pérez Vázquez
1 May 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. The speaker uses a clear introduction. Some phrasing is awkward, such as “…this time I’m going to talk about the ancient culture places…” Pacing is somewhat halting and elaboration is limited as a result, so that the speaker is only able to list the pyramids, but not describe them. Minor syntax errors and pauses interrupt fluidity of the response. The speaker is encouraged to focus on fluid speech and vocabulary for elaboration.

tsering topden
30 April 2017 India 1 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker mentions a beach. Speech is very rapid and there is ambient noise, so it is difficult to discern all of the words. The speaker seems to be repeating the word “holistic” as part of the description, which, if that is the word, would not be an applicable term. There are pauses between ideas. There is clarity as the speaker notes that the location is in northeast India, but much of the response is not clear. The speaker is encouraged to focus on enunciation, clarity, and pacing.

Hoa Dinh
29 April 2017 Viet Nam 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly establishes that the internet is the best option for learning about current events. She uses a framing device to organize her response (“I feel this way for two reasons”). She elaborates with a list of media provided by the internet, “interviews, articles…etc.” She also contrasts with television, “…the news lasts just one or two minutes…” She also mentions the ability to view different perspectives via the internet. Vocabulary and elaboration are very strong. Pacing and fluidity are adequate.

Rohith Sandesari
27 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly establishes that the internet is the best option for learning about current events. The speaker’s explanation for his point of view is not clear. He mentions “we can browse details,” but it is not immediately clear that he is referring to news. Pronunciation issues make some words and phrases unclear so that the speaker’s ideas are not fully elaborated, and the speaker repeats some words and phrases before moving on. Because of the issues with clarity and repetitions, the score is 2.

Guriqbal Saini
27 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly establishes that the internet is the best option for learning about current events. He elaborates by explaining that the media is free from “any media restrictions” showing strong vocabulary and a nuanced understanding of the prompt. There are some pauses between sentences, and some issues with pronunciation, as well as minor grammatical errors which lower the score.

Lucia Prieto
29 April 2017 Mexico 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location and lists specific reasons why tourists visits, “…a lot of resources…like tourist attractions…” The speaker elaborates on beaches, geographical features, and animals, showing a range of vocabulary. She uses a variety of sentence structures. There are some sentence fillers sounds, but these do not detract from the strength of the response, because of its strong delivery and elaboration.

Edcel Arat Jr
27 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question1-1

There is considerable background noise that interferes with delivery. The speaker names a location. Pace of delivery is very slow as the speaker seems to search for vocabulary. Elaboration is very limited. Because of simple sentence structure and very basic elaboration as well as some loss of clarity from background noise, the score is 2.

Rohith Sandesari
27 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s delivery is very rapid and the naming of the specific location is not completely clear. Speaker’s first language interferes with pronunciation throughout. The speaker frequently repeats words or phrases. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of speech and to focus on continuing on after perceiving an error, rather than repeating words, which interferes with fluidity of delivery.

Guriqbal Saini
27 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names the location and elaborates on its construction. Elaboration is adequate. Some sentence structure is awkward, such as “the symbol is described as both for love and peace…” The speaker explains that tourists are attracted to the location. Pacing is good, delivery is fluid, and pronunciation is strong.

maria guerrero
26 April 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker establishes that the internet is the better way to learn about current events because of greater access. Delivery is relatively fluid and elaboration is adequate with an example of being at work and being able to use the internet to find information. To improve her score the speaker should focus on using more specific details in her responses.

christel bernaldez
25 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker names TV as the best way to learn about current events. She says that TV is better because TV reads current events to you, giving you the chance to do other things. Elaboration is limited and delivery is somewhat halting. Because the response is very brief and limited, the score is 2.

deniz us
24 April 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker establishes that the internet is the best way to learn about current events. It is not clear that she understands that “current events” refers to news, as she refers to “products” on television and explains different resources such as online libraries, which do not seem directly related. Delivery is halting and not completely clear. There are grammatical errors, including verb and singular/plural errors.

Gary busters
24 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker establishes that the best way to learn about current events is through the internet because of the option of discussing events with friends through social media. He notes that internet is cheaper than “paying TV bills” and says that the internet is faster. Pacing is very rapid and there is some repetition of ideas. There are pauses/filler sounds between ideas. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of delivery and focus on clarity.

maria guerrero
26 April 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a city in Mexico. She explains that it is a popular destination because of architecture. There is some elaboration on the buildings with adequate vocabulary. Delivery is somewhat halting and there are minor grammatical errors (mountain climb, rather than climbing); The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery and fluidity of speech, avoiding pauses and slowing pace so that every word is clear.

christel bernaldez
25 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and explains where it is geographically. The response is well-organized and vocabulary is strong (incredible views, wildlife, tropical…etc); The speaker uses transitions between ideas and elaborates with many details. There are some minor grammatical errors, primarily with plurals/singulars, but these do not detract from meaning or lower the score.

deniz us
24 April 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker begins by introducing that she is from Turkey. Delivery is somewhat halted. Pronunciation is difficult at times and there are frequent pauses. Not all content is clearly meaningful, such as “…as you know the ? part…the ? dish….” The speaker is cut off before completing the response. Because of errors in delivery and limited elaboration the score is 2.

Gary busters
24 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location, the Taj Mahal. Pacing is halting, interrupted by multiple pauses, so that delivery is not fluid. There is some repetition, “Agra is the city…the city…city name…” as the speaker seems to search for vocabulary. There are some minor grammatical errors, which would not distract if delivery were more fluid. Sentence structure is basic, with little variety. The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery, avoiding pauses and filler sounds, slowing the pace, and avoiding repetition.

lou belle
24 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and its geographical location. She elaborates with specific details (crystal clear water); Pacing is excellent and intonation is clear. Delivery is fluid and vocabulary is adequate. This is a typical 4, or top scoring response.

Paige Saotome
22 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly understands the prompt and responds directly. She elaborates by citing the ability to read different articles, watching videos, and reading full details about current events. She does a good job of contrasting with television and provides a strong concluding or summarizing remark to close this excellent response.

Samiksha K
22 April 2017 United States 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not understand the topic and responds as though the topic refers to research in general. She seems to referring to “learning” in general, not to learning about current events or the news. Delivery is somewhat halting and elaboration is limited.

PS Narayanan
22 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker makes a clear selection and uses a framing device with two reasons to format his response. He does not clearly understand that “current events” refers to news and seems to be speaking about researching information in general. The answer is focused on the speed of research. Because the speaker does not address current events or news, the score is 2.

venkatamma potla
21 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker makes a choice – choosing internet. She clearly understands that “current events” refers to news. She elaborates that using the internet one can see the news on a mobile; she also makes the point that the news will “get updated for every minute with the help of the internet.” There are some very minor grammatical errors that do not interfere with meaning. This is a top-scoring response.

Paige Saotome
22 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker starts with a strong introduction, naming a specific island of the 7,000 in the Philippines. She elaborates with strong vocabulary (ambience, magnificent, etc); Pacing is excellent and the speaker uses a range of sentence structures. Fluidity is excellent. This is an ideal, high-scoring response.

Samiksha K
22 April 2017 United States 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location and indicates it is a popular location with tourists because of the beaches. She provides some very general elaboration, which tends to be repetitive (beaches, beauty…); The pacing is appropriate and speech is clear. Because elaboration is limited the score is 3. The speaker is encouraged to focus on elaboration in order to bring up her score on future responses.

PS Narayanan
22 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location. He identifies its geographical location and names a specific attraction and provides elaboration. The speaker provides interesting information about the Taj Mahal and shares what tourists typically do while visiting. Pacing is strong and articulation is good. The speaker uses a variety of sentence structures.

22 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location in India. He identifies some general reasons why the area is popular, “food, scenery, tranquility, whatever…” He also elaborates on a specific type of food (a kind of fish) and on the people who live in the area. Speech is very clear and pacing is excellent. Elaboration could be stronger, but with such clear delivery, it does not detract from the score.

venkatamma potla
21 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location and identifies where it is geographically. She uses an effective framing device, noting the location and the pleasant climate. The second point is not as clearly articulated, “the natural look is seen all over.” She makes another point that is not completely clear, “most of the people are literate, so the city will be neat mostly.” It is not clear what connection the speaker makes between reading/writing and the neatness of the city. Although the speech and articulation are very clear, the lack of clarity in the elaboration leads to a lower score.

nandini swaminathan
19 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker addresses the prompt by saying she prefers to watch television and finds the news “very accurate.” She clearly understands that current events refers to news. There are some pauses between ideas and some parts of the response are not clearly spoken – there is also loud ambient noise – so it may be that the speaker is speaking quietly and the noise in the background is overpowering her voice. She elaborates to some degree on the television news being “to the point.” There is little contrast with the internet.

Marjorie Bangay
21 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker immediately names a location. She describes three reasons why visitors enjoy the location. Her delivery is conversational and automatic. Sentence structure is varied and vocabulary is precise and interesting. She successfully describes the beach attractions and which tourists would most enjoy the specific attractions. This is a very successful, top-scoring response.

Cherryl Dimaocor
20 April 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker immediately names a specific location. The speaker elaborates by describing a white sand beach and blue, clear water. Descriptive details are strong, and vocabulary is precise, such as “food is an attraction because of its diversity…” There are some pauses between ideas and some awkward phrasing, such as “people…including other country…enjoy visit here…”   The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure for future attempts so that she can earn the highest score.

michelle santos
20 April 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker immediately names a specific location. Elaboration is limited…”…they can stroll around…and they can also play golf…” There are long pauses between ideas, and vocabulary is somewhat limited. Because of the limited elaboration and slow pacing the score is 3.

Pavan Kalyan RS
19 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt and names a location, describing the Taj Mahal. The speaker elaborates with some specific details, including describing the unique white marble. Pacing is excellent, as the speaker generally paces speech clearly. However, not all words are clearly discernible. There is repetition of a few basic ideas with awkward phrasing, such as “many people like to watch Taj Mahal.” Because of the limited development and unclear words, the score is a “low” 3.

nandini swaminathan
19 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and names a location. There are some pauses and filler sounds, but they are brief. There are some minor repetitions of words as the speaker self-corrects. Grammar is adequate and sentence structure is appropriate. There is strong vocabulary. Intonation is not expressive and pacing is very rapid, requiring listener effort at times.

Blanca Contreras
19 April 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds to the prompt and uses a framing device to organize her ideas. It is not clear that the speaker understands that “current events” refers to news. She refers to “topics” in a general sense and “events” – she does not discuss the idea of news at all, which suggests a lack of understanding of the main point of the topic, which is how to best receive information on current news.

shagun sharma
18 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt and uses an effect framing device to organize her prompt. There are minor grammatical errors, such as “you are updated to the news very soon.” Elaboration is strong, and sentence structure is adequate. The speaker attempts a contrast with television, but is cut off as she runs out of time. Because of the frequent, minor grammatical errors, the score is 3.

alejandra lujan
18 April 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker attempts to respond to the prompt. Delivery is halting, punctuated by pauses. It is not clear that the speaker understands that “current events” refers to news, as it seems she is speaking about learning and conducting research in general. Her elaboration focuses on “search” and “research” and “other users,” but makes no mention of news stories or current events. Since the speaker does not address the idea of news or current events, the highest possible score is 2.

John Paul Monterey
17 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds to the prompt. He understands that “current events” refers to news. Elaboration is somewhat limited, as in “every time you watch television…the anchors…the news…all the details are there….” It is not clear what the speaker means, or what he is saying about news anchors on televised news programs. Delivery is halting and inconsistently meaningful, as there seem to be words or ideas missing. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure and elaboration.

alejandra lujan
18 April 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker notes a specific location. Delivery is halting and includes repetitive phrasing (beautiful…so big…); Elaboration is somewhat limited and few connections are made between ideas (take the train, long walks, see plants…); Sentence structure is very simple. This is a “low” 3 score because the speech is clear and sustained. Some raters might score it a “high” 2 because of the lack of elaboration. The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure and developing elaborated responses.

ulka p
17 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly identifies a location she feels is the best place to visit. She goes on to note the geographical location within the country, which is strong elaboration. She adds interesting details, including describing “wellness centers” which tourists enjoy. Pacing is strong and delivery is fluid. There is a range of sentence structures and adequate vocabulary. A very strong response.

17 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. Pace of speech is very rapid and intonation leads to some issue of clarity and necessitates listener effort. There are some grammatical errors, “is being very very famous…” as well as repetitions and hesitations that interrupt the fluidity of delivery. Elaboration is limited and the speaker does not expand beyond a few general superlatives of description.

John Paul Monterey
17 April 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. He names a location. Not all details in the elaboration are clear. For example, he says the location has “its own…?...and its own blue sea…”  There are some minor grammatical errors, such as “that is why people are getting there…” Elaboration is very general, focused on superlatives (really good, really great), rather than specific details. This score is a “low” 3, meaning that some raters might see it as a 2 because of the lack of elaboration. The speaker is encouraged to focus on developing vocabulary to sustain elaborated responses to questions.

shagun sharma
18 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt, referring to the Taj Mahal. Diction is clear and ideas are sustained, with some minor repetition (wonders of the world). Pacing is excellent. There are some minor vocabulary error, “…which is attracted to tourists and visitors…” rather than “attractive to…”  The speaker monitors her time effectively so that she can provide a sound concluding sentence.

Blanca Contreras
19 April 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. She clearly identifies a location. Vocabulary is adequate, but elaboration is limited – “enjoy delicious food…observe crocodiles.” There are some awkward sentences structures, “…they love to observe the crocodiles…in the lagoon they live…” This is a high-scoring 3 response. With stronger sentences structure and more elaboration that shows a range of vocabulary the speaker could reach the top score.

rosendo castillo
16 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Speech is clear and pacing is adequate, if slow. He makes the nuanced point that bloggers are “full of false information” and uses rich vocabulary, such as “parody and satire.” Elaboration is somewhat limited, although it fulfils the requirements. This is scored a 4, although I would recommend the speaker focus on elaboration on future responses to ensure a high score.

rosendo castillo
16 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. Pacing is somewhat slow, but speech is clear. Elaboration is good – “white sand, clear water...”  The speaker does seem to struggle to explain some of the attractions, but ultimately does so without major hesitations or long pauses. This is scored a “low” 4 because the response is sustained and has no relevant errors. The speaker may want to focus on vocabulary development, so that he can grow more confident on future attempts.

MD SANJAR ALI
16 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and names the Taj Mahal. There is some first language interference in pronunciation so listener effort is necessary. There are significant grammatical errors and pronunciation errors that interfere with meaning. For example, “because of …its…height of …Taj Mahal…anyone who takes picture…by holding his hands..can be taken like this above the Taj Mahal…” which is not a clearly meaningful sentence. Because of issues with clarity, the score is 2.

Jerameel Juacalla
16 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker begins by naming a location that is the home of tobasco sauce. He does not specifically identify it as a place tourists might visit. There is significant ambient noise that interferes with delivery. The response is very brief and does not mention tourism or visitors at all – rather it explains the origin of the sauce and ends. Because of the brevity of the response and the lack of acknowledgement of the requirements of the prompt, the score is 2.

MD SANJAR ALI
16 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly responds and selects the internet. It is clear he understands that current events refers to news. Pacing is adequate, but phrasing is monotone and there is no indication of sentences ending or beginning. There is adequate elaboration and pronunciation is good. This is scored a 4. The speaker is encouraged to focus on pacing and intonation, as minor errors, combined with these issues could lower the score.

15 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses one option in the first sentence. He clearly understands that current events refers to news. He uses an anecdote about wanting to know “the ideal news.” Some of what follows is not clear. The speaker says he “ordered his mind,” which is not clear, then refers to searching for the information he wanted using Google. It may be that he meant it was more efficient to search for news than to wait for it to come on television. Pacing is adequate, but there are hesitations and some repetition that interferes with clarity.

Manuel Lunini
14 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly chooses one of the two options. It is not clear, however, that the speaker is responding to a prompt about “current events.” Rather he seems to be talking about learning in general, and referring to courses, teachers, and experts from universities like Harvard and Stamford. He also refers to the problem of advertising on TV channels. While pronunciation and pacing are strong in this response, the misunderstanding of the prompt keeps the score from being higher than 2.

Sahanaa Ramkumar
14 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly chooses one of the two options, and offers a clear framing device (two reasons); Vocabulary is rich (…may be showcased in a biased manner…); Development is strong and nuanced. Pronunciation is exacting, and pacing is excellent. A nearly-perfect response.

Rag Kateri
13 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly chooses one of the two options and uses a framing device for his response (there are two main reasons). Elaboration is not clear, and it is not clear if the speaker understands that “current events” refers to news. He refers to searching content and to “the world,” neither of which are fully developed reasons. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity, pacing, and full elaboration of ideas in future responses.

Paola Martínez
13 April 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker chooses one of the options in the first sentence of her response. She clearly understands that “current events” refers to news and makes the point that the internet provides more options than television. Pacing is adequate with some minor hesitations. Elaboration is acceptable, but does not provide specific details, other than the idea that there are additional options for finding more information. To earn a higher score, there would need to be more specific elaboration in the response.

Dmitry Varlamov
14 April 2017 Russian Federation 0 out of 4 Question1-1

No sound

Manuel Lunini
14 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening lacks precision, “A place in Spain for two reasons is…”  - it lacks clarity because the speaker is not introducing the idea that this is a location popular with tourists or visitors. Words are missing from the opening. There is some excellent, rich vocabulary (major, cultural component…) and pacing is adequate. Pronunciation is clear. Elaboration after the opening is very strong (Spanish gastronomy, like…). Overall, a good response, save the stumble at the start.

Sahanaa Ramkumar
14 April 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location. She very successfully establishes the geographical location with a precise description. The response is framed with a successful framework (there are two reasons); language is precise, pacing is appropriate and pronunciation is very strong.

Rag Kateri
13 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a specific location. The frames his response with two reasons for the popularity of the location. Delivery is very rapid, and not all words are clearly enunciated, requiring some listener effort to discern meaning. Pacing is halting at times and there are incomplete sentences, which also makes it difficult to understand the speaker’s entire delivery. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pacing and enunciate as clearly as possible.

Paola Martínez
13 April 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and names a location. She elaborates on the specific location of the palace of fine arts. She also elaborates on what tourists find at the location. Some language is imprecise, such as, “…you can listen to really music concerts…” Vocabulary is adequate, including some strong choices such as “exhibitions” instead of displays, demonstrating a range of vocabulary.  There are some hesitations and fillers between ideas, which interfere with pacing.

15 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and names a location. There are long pauses between statements and there seems to be another speaker interjecting in the response. The speaker offers some elaboration on the Taj Mahal, that it is a monument of love. Sentence structure is imprecise in places, such as “…one such place…they use a lot of visitors or tourists…” The speaker is encouraged to focus on pacing of delivery and precision of language.

Nur B
12 April 2017 Spain 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker addresses the prompt. She does seem to understand that current events refers to news. There is significant first language pronunciation interference that obscures some words. Some phrases are not clearly articulated such as, “I have always liked…?”  Pacing is appropriate, but elaboration is lacking primarily because of the lack of clarity.

Seda Ozel
12 April 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker addresses the prompt. She clearly understands that “current events” refers to news stories. She elaborates by making a connection to social media and how it is used to comment on news stories and using search engines to find related information. There are long pauses between ideas which interrupt the fluidity of delivery, but vocabulary is strong and elaboration is adequate.

Nur B
12 April 2017 Spain 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker attempts to address the prompt. There are minor grammatical lapses, such as “is a place where the visitors can enjoy.” Effort is required to determine meaning from the speech because of first language interference in pronunciation. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of her speech and to clearly enunciate words in English. It is better to speak a bit more slowly to ensure clarity. There is some elaboration in listing general kinds of food (salad, fish), and very general activities. Some words cannot be determined, “…and the ….and the best thing they can get is….” Because some words are obscured, the score is lowered to 2.

Seda Ozel
12 April 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker attempts to address the prompt. She notes that there are historical places in the city and that visitors come to the area to see historical buildings. There are lapses in grammar and long pauses. The response is marked by broad generalizations, such as “you can see Europe and Asia all together…” which is not directly responsive. Because of the pauses, minor lapses, and lack of elaboration, the score is 3.

Sarah Stoy
9 April 2017 United States 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker states her position immediately. She clearly establishes that she understands that “current events” refers to news. She notes a preference for using the internet and especially using Facebook and develops an elaborated and nuanced explanation of why – that she enjoys interacting with others as she reviews the news. This is a strong response that shows a clear understanding of the topic.

11 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker names a location at the start of the response. He effectively describes the geographical location and the features of the area. Vocabulary is rich (temples, beaches, etc.) Elaboration is somewhat limited to listing items such as temples, hotels, etc. The response would score higher if there were more details about what makes these features of this location special or interesting and if there were specific details. Continue to work on sentence variety and using complex sentences that use transition or conjunctions to show relationships between ideas.

8 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker begins with hesitations and repetitions (in my country…in my country…);  There is evidence of strong vocabulary (a mix of traditional and modern aspects of life). Sentence structure is varied and the speaker effectively uses transitions (on one hand…on the other hand); because of the repetitions, the score is lowered to 3. The speaker is encouraged to continue through perceived errors when she is speaker, rather than to restate phrases in an effort to make minor corrections. The restatements interrupt the fluidity and pacing of delivery and will lower the score.

Sarah Stoy
8 April 2017 United States 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location. Elaboration is not clear. She says, “the reason why it is very fame is because it sun as sweet as paper?” – this may be an issue of pronunciation or word choice that is interfering with delivery. The remainder of the response includes strong details such as “crystal clear waters” and a reference to “night life.” Some references are imprecise, such as “water diving.” Because of the clarity issues, this is scored a 2. The speaker is encouraged to enunciate clearly and monitor pacing.

jared tan
7 April 2017 Malaysia 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names a location. He describes it with rich elaboration and clear details. There are some minor grammatical errors, such as “one of a famous tourist attraction spots..” instead of “the famous…” but these do not detract from meaning and do not lower the score.

Kurt Jurgen Von Lumbao
6 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and establishes a position – that the best way to learn about current events is through the internet. The speaker goes on to refer to “research” as in “It is a powerful…method…of  getting things for your research…and gathering of data.” He also refers to “uploading of documents.” These details suggest a misunderstanding of the prompt, as he is not elaborating, specifically on current events, but, instead, speaking about academic research. Because the response is off topic, the highest possible score is 2.

soumya sehgal
6 April 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s volume is very low, and requires considerable listener effort. The speaker is referring to a location known for “natural beauty” surrounded by “mountains.” The pace of delivery is very rapid and pronunciation is not always clear. Combined with the low volume, not all words are discernible. The speaker is encouraged to speak clearly at an audible volume and to maintain sustained ideas within each sentence.

Kurt Jurgen Von Lumbao
6 April 2017 Philippines 1 out of 4 Question1-1

There is considerable background noise which interferes with delivery – be sure to speak in a quiet room as the microphone picks up other sounds. It seems that the speaker directly responds to the prompt, but not all words are clear.

sam reddi
4 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt and names a specific location. Delivery is fluid and sentence structure is complex. For example, the speaker effective lists three types of attractions at the location (beaches, clear waters, exquisite waterfalls, ancient churches); the vocabulary is notable, but sometimes imprecise or lacking explanation, such as “well noted for its delicious seafood which is a real popular heritage of their culture.” This is an incomplete and grammatically incorrect sentence, as “real popular heritage” is not a clearly meaningful phrase. There are some hesitations in delivery, but they seem related to thinking about content rather than language.

ali mehmet
4 April 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt and names a specific location. Delivery is halting. There are some errors in vocabulary, such as using words like “touristic.” Some sentence structures are repetitive due to corrections, “a place with fairy chimneys…fairy chimneys…made by volcanoes..” Vocabulary is somewhat limited with repetition of words like beautiful and tourists, rather than additional elaboration. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary that will enable you to elaborate with concrete details, rather than general descriptions. Have specific details will always improve your score.

Pamela Ferma
4 April 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt and names a specific location. The inclusion of information about the popularity of the location with bloggers shows complexity of elaboration and strengthens the response. Delivery is somewhat slow, but not to the point of a point deduction. Vocabulary is strong, showing nuanced use of word choice (lakes, lagoons) and the speaker concludes with a summarizing point. Well done

sam reddi
4 April 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. It seems that she attempts to make the point that the internet consumes less time than TV, but says that “it consumes lot of time,” which is not consistent with the rest of the information provided about the difference between the two media. The speaker does not directly or indirectly indicate an understanding of the term “current events.”  Delivery is fluid and vocabulary and sentence structure are strong. There are minor grammatical errors, but they do not detract from meaning.

Pedro Paulo Gattai Gomes
2 April 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and states a position with a clear reason (with the internet we can choose more than one source of information…). Speech is halting and fluidity is interrupted with filler sounds, requiring listener effort. There is some contrast to television having a single source of information. The speaker is encouraged to focus on fluidity of speech and vocabulary for elaboration.

Bulkhia Panalondong
3 April 2017 Philippines 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Delivery is halting. Some words are not discernible, which interferes with fulfilling the task. The speaker seems to be focused on describing the location of the island, more than the reasons why it is attractive to tourists. There are some missing words that interfere with clarity, such as “Philippines’ is located near the tropical…at the…”  so the main point is not realized.

yaqeen luay
1 April 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. There is strong vocabulary, as the speaker notes that tourists enjoy visiting “and sightseeing.” The location is described with some elaboration (represents Islamic history)  but not a lot of specific details. There are general statements such as “it has so many things that attract tourists,” that don’t provide information.  There are some grammatical errors, such as, “Also Istanbul is very famous of its shops…there…” and hesitations and pauses that interfere with delivery.

Pedro Paulo Gattai Gomes
2 April 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds to the prompt. Delivery is halting with frequent filler sounds. Syntax is awkward with some issues of clarity. Elaboration is limited. The single point the speaker makes is that the location is popular because of the temperature being 10 degrees, which is insufficient information. The speaker is encouraged to focus on delivery and fluidity of speech and on developing vocabulary to increase his ability to elaborate on a point.

Daiane Chiquito
31 March 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. Sentence structure is complex, as the speaker compares and contrasts TV and the internet. However, the example she uses, philosophy, is not related to current events (or news). There is some imprecise vocabulary, such as “trustful” rather than trustworthy. While intonation and pacing are excellent, the lack of details related directly to the prompt and minor vocabulary have lowered the score.

jay Rakwal
28 March 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker attempts to address the prompt. Some of the words in the introduction are not clearly intelligible. He mentions the term “current events.” Vocabulary and sentence structure are basic. There are significant pauses between ideas and listener effort is required to discern what the speaker is saying at times. The speaker is encouraged to focus on the fluidity of speech as well as on expanding vocabulary so that he can deliver more detailed and elaborated responses.

GAURAV PRAJAPATI
30 March 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker addresses the prompt by noting that there are monuments in Delhi. The description lacks detail and is very general. Pacing is adequate. Enunciation is unclear at times, so that listener effort is required and at times words are not discernable. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of speech, use specific information in responses, and enunciate words clearly.

jay Rakwal
28 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. Sentence structure is awkward and word choice is somewhat imprecise, as in “there is unexplained beauty of mountains and beautiful terrains,” which does not have a clear meaning. Pacing is adequate, although there are pauses within sentences that interfere with clarity. Sentence structure is basic. The speaker is encouraged to focus on precision and fluidity of his speech to bring up the score.

Daiane Chiquito
31 March 2017 Brazil 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker addresses the prompt directly in the opening sentence and clearly identifies a location. Elaboration is strong, and the speaker adds her own experience, that she’s visited the location three times, which is an excellent detail. She also identifies a potential problem with visiting and notes that the location is very popular, showing evidence of complex sentence structure. There are some minor pronunciation errors, specifically with the “th” sound in words like “worth,” which the speaker may want to focus on.

29 March 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds to the prompt, but the introduction is not clear, “…the…way to learn about current events is by internet or by the web…” which suggests these are two different options. Elaboration is not completely clear. There is a reference to social media and some comparison to television on which on can “see….the…the…..?...occur…” Some sentences are not clearly meaningful or related to current events, such as “…on the internet you can see people sharing…events…and the idea..the other people…” Clear and specific elaboration is crucial to earning the highest score. The speaker is encouraged to enunciate clearly and use concrete details.

29 March 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. There are some repetitions as the speaker self-corrects. It is always best practice to go on, rather than repeat and attempt to correct. There is some elaboration, but not all is clear, such as “ice cream…lunch…some dishes that are traditional…” but not all details are clearly stated, which lowers the score. The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of her speech and focus on clear enunciation.

sowmya alakesan
27 March 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker begins by discussing the increase in student use of internet, which is not directly related to the prompt. The second sentence, which attempts to address the prompt, is difficult to decode, “the best way to be learned about current events is easy by internet…”  The speaker returns to the different uses of the internet, but doesn’t cover the topic. Instead of discussing the contrast between learning about current events on TV or the internet (and the relative benefits of either media) she expounds on the uses of the internet. Because this is not directly responsive, it cannot earn higher than 2. If the speaker had not mentioned current events at all, the score would be 1. Be sure to review the prompt carefully so that you’re responding to the question that is asked and your response is eligible for the highest score.

pranav prabhakar
26 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly responds to the question. Intonation is relatively clear. The speaker should focus on clearly ending one sentence before ending the next – as the he moves from one idea to the next very quickly. Scorers listen for clear sentence structure, so you want to be sure that you’re demonstrating full sentences. Pronunciation is adequate and elaboration is good, but not excellent – consider how to add specific details, rather than superlatives (most, best) – instead, say something specific about the location.

Maria Ruvalcaba
24 March 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly identifies a museum and explains that the artist is well-known world wide. Some vocabulary is strong, but there are some syntax errors and some lack of clarity, “…and she represents nowadays feminism and….unclear…”  The speaker drops some possessives, “…to fight for woman rights,” rather than “…to fight for women’s rights.” Elaboration is adequate. The score of 3 represents the minor errors and lack of clarity.

sowmya alakesan
27 March 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The introduction is strong. Intonation is clear and pacing is effective. The speaker uses a range of effective vocabulary. The speaker uses a variety of sentence structures and elaboration is very good, including a well-developed translation to explain the tourist site. This is a strong 4 response.

elora sharmin
22 March 2017 Bangladesh 1 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear that the speaker understands the prompt or that she is speaking about current events. For example, the speaker says, “We can choose different things, for example, we can choose the emails and we can see the different things that come,” which does not seem to be related to news or current events. There are errors in grammar that interfere with meaning, (what we need it or not need it…and we can also remove and can also maybe …it can be….); As there are issues with clarity and the response does not directly respond to the prompt, the highest score can be 1.

elma sojo
22 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker has excellent pacing, pronunciation, and a wide range of vocabulary. However, she seems to be speaking about “learning” in a general sense, and not about “learning about current events.” As a result, this is a response that would likely be sent for a second review and could be scored as low as 2.

Akib Hasan
23 March 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

It is not clear if the speaker is responding directly to the prompt and the name and description of the location are either not clearly established or obscured by pronunciation. Vocabulary is limited, as noted by the frequent repetition of the word “beautiful.”  Some sentences are not clearly meaningful (how many times they come to more country); The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity of sentences and vocabulary in order to improve his score.

elora sharmin
22 March 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker attempts to address the prompt. Sentence structure is unclear (…the visitor or tourist that is popular in my country). The speaker attempts to describe a bay; there is repetition and correction that interferes with clarity of delivery so that significant listener effort is required to determine meaning. Some descriptions are not clear, such as “there are very natural looking area….” The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and sentence structure – and perhaps consider learning some basic phrases that can be applied to multiple prompts, which will improve fluidity.

elma sojo
22 March 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. There are minor grammatical errors, such as using the future tense (“a place will be”) rather than present. Speech is relatively fluid and diction is mostly clear. Vocabulary is strong and varied and there is a range of sentence structures. Despite the minor grammatical error the score is 4.

Pramod Shyam Sundar H M
21 March 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not state a preference; rather he presents the advantages of both TV and the internet. In the actual test, missing the requirement to contrast ideas means that the highest possible score is 2. Sentence structure is awkward at times (Yes, it’s the best way to learn the current events through the internet); There is some strong vocabulary (internet is a hub); The speaker is encouraged to read each prompt carefully and identify the central task so that he can earn the highest grade.

Catherine Tabalanza
20 March 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly states her position in the first sentence. There is some hesitation in forming sentences (because…I’m…mostly online…), but this does not interfere with clarity. The pacing is a bit slow, but vocabulary is very strong (various domains here in the Philippines and abroad). Sentence structure is complex, demonstrating the ability to effectively compare and contrast ideas. A strong response overall.

Pramod Shyam Sundar H M
21 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Pronunciation and diction are generally good. Pacing is acceptable, but at times the speaker speaks too quickly for comprehension. The speaker effectively uses a framing device (There are many places to visit such as…);  Some sentences are not completely clear (festival…which is going to be celebrated over there…) and suggest locations or directions that are not made clear to the listener. There are some sentence construction errors (and it is also many people go there to celebrate the functions); The speaker is encouraged to focus on sentence structure, pacing, and organization in future responses.

JORGE LUIS FERNANDEZ LOPEZ
21 March 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Pronunciation and diction are good. Pacing is acceptable, with some pauses between ideas. There are some grammatical errors, such as “is one of the Latin Americas that has the huge number of museums.” There is also repetition (a lot of museums) which suggests some limits in vocabulary. The speaker is encouraged to focus on expanding vocabulary so that responses can be varied. Also focus on sentence structure. The speaker has strong basic sentences, and should attempt more complex constructions.

Catherine Tabalanza
20 March 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Pronunciation and diction are excellent. Pacing is very strong, with few pauses. Vocabulary is strong (It is popularly known…) and sentence structure is complex (not only is it attractive to the tourists, it is attractive to the locals as well). This is clearly a top-scoring response. Well done.

natalya finkel
19 March 2017 Russian Federation 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. She makes the point that the internet is a better source of current events than television, primarily because of censorship. There are some hesitations or stumbles in delivery, but these seem to be content related, as the speaker searches for points to make, and not a language issue.

janaki ankam
18 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt, but the opening statement has syntax problems as the speaker restates the prompt in a way that makes it difficult to understand her point of view. She eventually establishes that she prefers internet and makes relevant comparisons, such as the delay in broadcasting on TV that is not found on the internet. There are some pronunciation issues, such as “free.” There are some pauses in delivery, leading to the speaker being unable to complete her response in the allotted time.

janaki ankam
18 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. There are some awkward sentence structures, such as “according to me…” but overall delivery is strong and vocabulary is effective, such as “it is a symbol of love” or it is “built of pure marble.” There are some hesitations between ideas and the response is cut off as a result, which leads to a lower score. The speaker is encouraged to focus on time and pacing.

natalya finkel
19 March 2017 Russian Federation 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker does an excellent job of establishing the context of her response. Diction is clear and grammar seems automatic. The response is nuanced as the speaker explains that the small village is popular with tourists who discover it, but it is not well known. She goes on to explain the town is home to seven monasteries. Vocabulary is strong (enjoyed it immensely) and the response is very well organized.

JULIO RAMIREZ
16 March 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not clearly address the prompt in the opening sentence. He references corruption and says, “…to learn about the television is not very good,” which is not a clear indication of a preference related to current events. He goes on to say, “This a lot of problem with the different television…” which suggests he is referring to mechanical problems with televisions, and not addressing the topic of accessing information about current events. Finally, at the end, he indicates it is “best to learn about the different event through the internet.” It is not clear that he is distinguishing between current events (or news) and information about upcoming events. The final statement, “For me is the best internet…” does not have a clear meaning. The speaker is encouraged to directly address each topic in the first sentence, and continue to work on building vocabulary in order to develop fully elaborated responses.

JULIO RAMIREZ
16 March 2017 Mexico 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Some syntax is awkward, such as “In Mexico exists many …beautiful cities…” rather than “There are many beautiful cities…in Mexico…” There are also some dropped articles, such as “…is big city…”  Vocabulary is somewhat limited, such as the repetition of “nature.” Pauses and hesitations interfere with clarity and pacing, requiring listener effort in some places. Overall this is a coherent response. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary acquisition so that delivery is more varied and fluid.

Rodrigo Gramacho
14 March 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. His enunciation is generally clear and the pacing is appropriate.   There are some hesitations in speech, but it is clear that these are indications that the speaker is considering what to say, rather than how to say it.  There are some areas that are not completely clear..”It is know …warm weather and beautiful beach.” Be aware of dropped articles, “It’s a very old city, rather than “its very old city.” Usually dropped articles will not lower the score significantly, but combined with other errors or problems with delivery, it can affect the overall score.

14 March 2017 Japan 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. His enunciation is generally clear and the pacing is appropriate.   There is some hesitation in delivering information, “Which is popular…which is getting popular with foreign visitors these days.” These types of repetitions can stand out to a scorer, so it is always better to continue on, rather than try to repeat to correct a mistake or add elaboration that was intended. There is also some repetition of vocabulary (famous), which may appear as indication of limited range in vocabulary. The speaker is encouraged to avoid repetition and expand some common vocabulary, especially synonyms for words that might occur frequently in responses.

Marinette Rosario Visda
12 March 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response directly addresses the task. Delivery is clear and the speaker makes very specific points about access and content. She uses rich, precise vocabulary (access the internet and go to any establishment). Her focus is clear and she offers strong explanations. The only issue in actual scoring might be the focus on the actual access point rather than comparing the type of information provided by each media. On future responses, consider the larger implications of the question as well as the literal meaning.

Fatema Jahan Sharna
11 March 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response directly addresses the task. Expression is generally fluid, although listener effort is required for some phrases, such as, “If I use the internet ..then I have ? at the hand…” This statement doesn’t convey clear meaning. The pace of delivery increases as the response progresses and speech becomes less intelligible. The speaker is encouraged to slow her pace and focus on the clear enunciation of each word. Adding content is not effective in raising the score if the content is not clear to the listener.

prethiv kalai
12 March 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response directly addresses the task. The speech is generally fluid, with minor difficulties in pacing, noted with pauses. Development is strong when the speaker describes the beach, but there are hesitations in “it is ruled by…ruled by…” which may be a lack of vocabulary or content. These sorts of repetitions lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to speak more slowly and focus on articulation of each word.

Hải Ngọc Nguyễn Thị
11 March 2017 Viet Nam 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. Speech is basically intelligible, though effort is needed because of unclear articulation. Development is limited and vocabulary is basic, “Visitors enjoy this because visitors can enjoy go to swim and eat foods, sea foods, and is very very…” There is limited range of sentence structure, and only simple sentences are presented, with varying degrees of success. Pacing is very slow, requiring listener effort to maintain the point the speaker makes.

Fatema Jahan Sharna
11 March 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. It is generally intelligible and coherent. Some speech is obscured by environmental noise and some expressions are not clear or clearly related to the text, such as “first of all it is the ‘longest place in the new world…”” It may be that the speaker said something different, but the words were not clearly articulated. There is evidence of relevant vocabulary, such as “specific reasons.” Because of the unclear pacing and unclear enunciation, the score is lowered to 3.

Marinette Rosario Visda
12 March 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening is clear. The response fulfills the demands of the task with no errors in pronunciation. Some First language intrusion is obvious in the pronunciation of “located,” but this does not lower the score. Response is well-paced with few noticeable lapses. The speaker uses excellent, precise vocabulary, such as “urbanized.” All ideas are effectively and coherently expressed.

ezgi akar
2 March 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The opening statement is marked by hesitation and minor grammatical errors, “The best way to learn about current event …through the…is…is the… internet , I think that.” The errors in syntax and long pauses make it difficult to immediately understand the topic or the speaker’s response.  Development is very general, referring to “lots of sources,” and “everything you want to learn,” which are not details specific to current events. The contrast to television is not clear, “television is…just…only…a defined space for you.”  Grammar errors, “what the media wants say you…you just only…you can…” clearly interfere with meaning so that the points contrasting TV and the internet are not made. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and organization, especially syntax, or the order of words in sentences.

ezgi akar
2 March 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly addresses the prompt by naming a specific location. Vocabulary and development are limited and the response includes many noticeable pauses and grammatical errors that interfere with fluidity and require listener effort to determine meaning. For example, “most of the visitors…or tourists…come…to…the Istanbul…Turkey…for the just seeing this palace…”The speaker is encouraged to focus on pronunciation and vocabulary development to improve her score.

Sumit pandey
28 February 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening of this response is very strong and clearly stated. There is a hesitation and interruption of fluid delivery as the speaker begins the reasons, “you should visit there…to see the…people…and ….” When you encounter a problem like this in your delivery, try to keep going, rather than repronounce words. It will improve the part of your score that relates to fluid delivery and how “automatic” your grammar is.

abhignan m
27 February 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not immediately clear that the speaker is responding to a prompt requiring a choice between internet and television. Eventually the speaker makes the claim, that the internet is the best source of news. Delivery is slow, but speech is clear. Elaboration is limited, but includes some strong details – that there are articles available on the internet for free. It is not clear if the cost of information is the determining factor the speaker is using to support the choice. Speaker is encouraged to speak more directly to the prompt on future responses, as time is limited and it is important to include clear elaboration.

26 February 2017 Azerbaijan 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states her position. Delivery is strong from the start, with good elaboration. There are some minor sentence structure errors, “you can learn many views in a really amount of short time.” These errors do not interfere with meaning, but keep the response from reaching the top score. The specific example of an event in Turkey is strong, especially as the speaker uses some strong vocabulary (with the minor grammar errors) “TVs are manipulating the events.”

Sneha Kulkarni
25 February 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states her position. Vocabulary is adequate (ask questions on forums), but development is limited. There are some repetitions, especially at the end, “you can get…lou…lou?” It is not clear what the speaker is saying at this point. The speaker is encouraged to focus on pacing, pausing at the end of sentences, and using expression in her response.

elo elo
25 February 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states her position and immediately provides a frame for the response (there are a couple of reasons).  Hesitation interrupts the speaker’s development of her ideas. These pauses make it necessary for the listener to put effort into putting together the ideas she shares. The speaker is encouraged to focus on the fluidity of her delivery, as vocabulary and intonation are excellent.

akhilesh prajapati
25 February 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states his position at the start of the response. There are minor word omissions, such as “example” rather than “for example.” Elaboration on the news channels is excellent, and the speaker makes a strong contrast with the internet. Word errors interfere with meaning and some phrasing is vague/awkward, “We don’t get anything correct…”

abhignan m
27 February 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker is describing a location. The location, which is not clearly stated is in the southern hemisphere and has a pleasant climate. Some words in this response are clearly spoken; others are not. The speaker is not speaking directly into the microphone and is speaking at a very low volume. Audible speech is basically clear, but listener effort is required to determine specific words and put together ideas. The speaker presents. The speaker is encouraged to focus on pronunciation and sentence diction.

Sneha Kulkarni
25 February 2017 India 1 out of 4 Question1-1

Please speak directly into the microphone. Not all words are clearly expressed, even at top volume. The speaker is describing Taj Mahal. Development is limited (primarily because not all words can be heard).

Devi Valentina
25 February 2017 Indonesia 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Speech is halting and difficult to understand because of very prominent background sounds. Not all words are clearly pronounced, so there is not a fluid delivery of information. It may be that the speaker is talking about shopping, but no elaboration is clearly expressed. The speaker refers to going to Bali with her friends and describes “the place that I like,” but that description is not clearly delivered.

elo elo
25 February 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Generally well-paced expression. The subject is introduced clearly at the start of the response, with strong and precise vocabulary (domestic and international tourists). The description is strong, but sentences are interrupted with filler sounds that make it somewhat difficult to follow the speaker’s description.  Because the speech is not fluid, the score is 3.

akhilesh prajapati
25 February 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

It is not clear what specific location the speaker is referring to. This is due to a combination of background noise and the speaker using a low voice. It seems the speaker is talking about a hotel in Mumbai. He notes that this hotel, which is not named, is “the most famous hotel for the tourists to stay.” The lack of specific information and hesitant deliver make it difficult to determine what the speaker is referring to. There are some errors in singular/plural. The speaker is encouraged to focus on enunciation and pronunciation so all words are clearly understood.

26 February 2017 Azerbaijan 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task appropriately. Speech is generally clear. There are minor pauses between sentences. Sentence structure is awkward, ”it is a historical place…everyone wants to have that experience….like visiting somewhere really old…”  The point related to shopping is not fully developed, “many replicas…replica bags…” it is not clear what the speaker is referring to. Because of some lapses in development, this response scores 3.

Md Mahabubur Rahman
19 February 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It takes the speaker time to establish the focus of the response. In a short recorded response a lengthy introduction about what “some people” believe can only lower the score, as it is not a direct response and it creates opportunities for errors. The speaker eventually establishes that the internet is the best source for current events. There is a framework (first of all…); There are errors in intonation/pronunciation that make it difficult to understand the speaker’s ideas clearly, “The television have some….some videos that….” The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and pronunciation – so that the listener can understand every word.

Hoa Dinh
18 February 2017 Viet Nam 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. There is intelligible speech, but some problems with delivery and coherence. For example, there are minor hesitations and repetition of syllables in words: “pop..popular..”  Delivery is generally fluid, although there are hesitations that interfere with the pacing. The speaker uses and effective frame (two reasons) and maintains the organization (the first reason) throughout the response. Vocabulary is adequate. The speaker is advised to work on pace of delivery and intonation to ensure clarity.

sunny dey
13 February 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

It is not immediately clear that the speaker addresses the task. Fewer words in the opening are clearly articulated, but the phrase “world heritage site” is clear. Vocabulary is strong and sustained with consistency. Delivery is uneven, with pauses and some repetition, requiring listener effort to discern specific words. There are grammatical errors (…it locates within the city…) that also require listener effort to decode to determine meaning. Control is limited and full expression is not demonstrated.

Md Mahabubur Rahman
19 February 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Response addresses the task, speech is basically intelligible, although there are portions that are not clear, “largest….?...in the world…” making it difficult to determine the level of development in the response.  There are grammar errors with verbs (have instead of has, for example). The speaker discusses some sort of game, but it is not clear what he’s referring to. Because of the lack of clear intonation for some words, development and clarity are limited and the score is 2.

Helen Ong
10 February 2017 Malaysia 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task appropriately and speech is generally clear with fluid expression. There are minor hesitations but few “filler sounds” that interrupt delivery. There are some minor, but noticeable pacing issues that interrupt sentences. Grammar is fairly automatic, but there are minor errors such as singular/plural nouns (…one of the place…).  There are minor but consistent errors in pronunciation such as leaving out the “L” sound in the word climb. The response is effectively organized and delivers good content, noting that there are four specific activities at the mountain: climbing, taking pictures, enjoying the hot springs, and seeing the flora and fauna.

Ranya Dhelle Cabahug
10 February 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker addresses the task by mentioning a “tourist spot” in the opening. There are either word choice/pronunciation issues that interfere with meaning (…cost a huge bust in the Philippines). The elaboration is otherwise very strong with specific details about the attraction, which enables tourists to swim with “big fishes.” Delivery is relative automatic with only minor hesitations. The final statement, however, is a bit unclear, as the speaker says (…humans and animals can also sink/synch); If the speaker meant that they could live in synch, that point is not clearly made. If the speaker means that both can literally sink or descend, it is not clear what this information was included. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity of vocabulary and organization of ideas.

hl hl
6 February 2017 Viet Nam 2 out of 4 Question2-1

Speech is basically intelligible but hesitations in syllables and unclear articulation require listener effort to discern. Eventually it becomes clear that the speaker prefers the news on the internet because of the commenting feature (and..they might…they might be debating…).  Grammatical structure is awkward (something could be enlightened to me…that’s why I think…those are the things that are unavailable on TV). Development of ideas is somewhat limited, although the speaker’s intent is evident. Unfortunately expression is vague and connections are not effective. The speaker is encouraged to review vocabulary and sentence structure, and perhaps practice key phrases for transitioning from one idea to another.

hl hl
6 February 2017 Viet Nam 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker introduces the location clearly in the first sentence. Delivery is halting but speech is clear. Topic development is limited and there is one main idea presented – that the weather is warm. The substance of the response is somewhat repetitive. Control of grammar is strong, but vocabulary is limited. With additional elaboration and more fluid delivery this could reach the 4 level.

Turasul Bari
5 February 2017 Qatar 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker clearly states his position in the first sentence, making clear that he has understood the prompt. He uses an apt example of a cricket match, explaining that a match is available both on the internet and on TV, but on the internet the viewer can pause, replay, etc., and has more control over the content. There is quite a bit of repetition, “you could…you can…” and it seems that the speaker is trying to speak very quickly, resulting in repeating ideas. There are several pauses and fillers (um) which interrupt the fluidity of delivery. Pronunciation is overall strong and grammar is acceptable. The speaker seems to have a cough, which is causing some interruptions. In regular scoring this might be overlooked, as long as the rest of the response was strong.

shubham trivedi
5 February 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question1-1

With listening effort it becomes obvious that the speaker is going to speak about a location in western India. The speaker hesitates and repeats some words, such as “bee…beach…beaches…” which interrupts the fluidity of delivery. Intonation is not consistently clear and the pace of speech is rapid and sometimes not clearly discernible, so that words are lost. Some sentences such as the “beaches…the beaches…the beaches around there…” interrupt delivery of information. Grammar is uneven, with multiple errors in singular and plurals and subject/verbs.

saravanan murugesan
4 February 2017 India 0 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s rate of speech is very rapid, making it difficult to discern the specific words he is saying. Unfortunately the rapid speech and an underlying hum over the low volume of the speech makes this difficult if not impossible to hear. In regular test scoring this response would be rejected for “technical difficulties.”

koray çamlıca
3 February 2017 Turkey 0 out of 4 Question1-1

It sounds like the microphone was not turned on. There is no sound.

Turasul Bari
5 February 2017 Qatar 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker clearly names the location in the first sentence. There is strong vocabulary (iconic site), but also some hesitations and repetitions, “largest river.”  The speaker has a cold and his coughing frequently through the response, which effects the fluidity, unfortunately. The speaker stops talking before the end of the allotted time and the response is incomplete.

Aman Mathur
29 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task appropriately with a clear topic sentence that names a location. There is some fluidity, but there are several pauses between words. Vocabulary is strong, with words such as “serene, diversity, scarcity, etc.” The explanation of diversity is interesting, but the speaker seems to lose the thread of discussion (see it in the streets, in the buildings…) and the discussion ends. The speaker is encouraged to work on fluidity and connecting ideas and words with more confidence, as grammar and vocabulary are more than sufficient.  3

Aman Mathur
29 January 2017 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not immediately clear that the speaker understands the prompt, as he seems to be speaking about learning in a general sense, rather than the specific topic of learning about current events. He then makes a correction to refer to the topic but brings up an option of “real-time experience,” which continues to indicate a misunderstanding of the subject. The topic refers to “current events” meaning the news of the day, which is not something people generally learn about in “real time,” but is reported. There are hesitations in speech, but pronunciation is clear. Because there is not a clear understanding of the topic, the score cannot be higher than 2.

M P
31 January 2017 United States 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response fulfills the requirements of the task and the opinion is clearly stated at the start of the response. Delivery is somewhat halting in explaining the internet, “provides a larger base…and a larger area…” which is not precise.  The speaker seems to search for phrasing and makes minor errors in “search the multiple news….” The speaker makes good use of an idiomatic expression, “you have to be glued to the TV only at a particular time.” Some raters might score this a 3 because of the accumulation of minor errors. It would likely end up a 3.5 with a split between raters.

M P
31 January 2017 United States 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The response fulfills the requirements of the task. Expression is fluid and speech is clear. Grammar and vocabulary are highly automatic, requiring little time to consider words or long pauses. Vocabulary is strong such as “the place is very scenic….” There is a stumble near the end with “greenery…there is a lot of greenery…” as well as the reference to “pickings…” but these errors do not lower the score.

Yama Choezom
26 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening sentence clearly names a location and establishes the main point of the response. There is a framework to the response (two reasons) and the description of the monument that has “historical significance” shows strong vocabulary. The second reason is delivered less effectively as the speaker hesitates and repeats, “It is the biggest…top of the world…” which makes it difficult to understand the point. Because of the strong vocabulary, the score is 3.

Avijeet Shil
28 January 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds to the prompt in the first sentence. He elaborates with information that many visitors come to the location. There is considerable hesitation between words, but there is some strong vocabulary, “reaction of tourists is positive.” There is no elaboration, as the speaker does not describe the location or why it is popular. The response requires listener effort because of issues with pacing and delivery as well as first language influence on pronunciation. The speaker is encouraged to plant before speaking and work to avoid long pauses between words

Avijeet Shil
28 January 2017 Bangladesh 1 out of 4 Question2-1

Speech is not clear from the first sentence. There is some repetition, and not all words are enunciated. The next sentence, “Have to use internet because there is no possibility to keep a dislike….” It is not clear what the speaker is saying through this section. It may be that the speaker has misunderstood the prompt as he is referring to improving himself and improving his future, which are not points related to the prompt. Because the response is not directly related to the prompt, it is scored a 1. The speaker is encouraged to review speaking prompts carefully before responding.

Yama Choezom
26 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker does not make clear the subject of the response in the first sentence. Keep in mind that the scoring considers if a listener can understand the response without having read the prompt, so do try to provide a clear introductory sentence. Speech is rapid, and is punctuated by pauses. There are some lapses in clarity, such as “Internet will get you the thing that you are looking for.” It is not immediately clear how that is related to current events. The speaker then notes that you "will  get the exact information that you are looking for” with television, which doesn’t indicate a contrast. Elaboration is strong with the example of learning about “current situation in the United States.” The speaker runs out of time without finishing the point she’s making.

merve pisman
27 January 2017 Iran, Islamic Republic Of 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker makes his position clear in the first sentence. There is some repetition and hesitation in the response, “I’m working…working so hard…in my work…so I’m…so …” There is strong framework (two reasons) to the response and the speaker elaborates well. For example, he explains that he reads a lot for work and prefers not to read about current events on the computer. Because of the hesitations and repetition, the score is 3. The speaker is encouraged to practice speaking fluidly to avoid these deductions.

Nguyen Ngoc
25 January 2017 Viet Nam 2 out of 4 Question1-1

It is not clear that the speaker is describing a specific location. First language interference in pronunciation makes it difficult to determine what the speaker’s words. There is difficulty with “p” and “h” sounds as well as vowels.  There is little elaboration, other than repeating that the “visitor very enjoy” or “enjoy” the location, which is not identified. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity in pronunciation and on vocabulary, as adding more elaboration and detail will be the best way to begin improving the score.

yok hukmunde
26 January 2017 Turkey 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt in the first sentence. There are some minor grammar issues, such as, “…you can visit so many places as the tourists…” which includes errors in singular/plural and articles.  Elaboration is strong with this response, as the speaker clearly explains the importance of the mosque and its location.  He also elaborates on other historical locations in the area. There are pauses in the delivery, as well as filler sounds that will lower the score. The speaker may want to practice pausing silently between words, which will have less of an impact on delivery and may bring up the score.

yok hukmunde
26 January 2017 Turkey 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear from the first sentence that the speaker completely understands that the prompt refers to current events or news. The response is marked by hesitations, filler, and repetition, such as, “I strongly be-believe-believe that…learn-learning new things…” These hesitations and fillers interfere with fluidity of delivery. There are some grammatical errors, such as, “…there are like so many information on the internet…”  rather than, “…there is so much information on the internet…”  Because of the limitations in development and hesitant pacing, the score is 2. The speaker is encouraged to practice fluid speech with few interruptions and to work on vocabulary so that it is more automatic in delivery.

25 January 2017 Japan 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The opening sentence is clear, but the sentence structure is awkward. The speaker says, “I prefer getting information from TV if the purpose is learning about current events…”rather than the simple statement of agreement.  Vocabulary is strong, and transitions are excellent, as in “although recently TV has begun to have information…especially in national broadcasting.”  There are some pronunciation issues that require listener effort. Some raters might drop the score to a three because of these issues. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clear, precise pronunciation, especially of consonant sounds at the beginning of words.

Hoang Trung
22 January 2017 Viet Nam 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening sentence clearly states the location. There is strong elaboration, such as describing the location as one of “seven world heritages in the world,” but language is imprecise, as this should be “one of seven world heritage sites.”  There are pauses that interfere with fluidity, such as “it has….stunning landscapes..” The speaker is careful in intonation and is clearly making an effort to pronounce words with precision. To earn a higher score, the speaker is encouraged to focus on the fluidity of speech, to avoid long pauses, and use appropriate intonation.

r patil
22 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening statement is clear and restates the prompt to provide context. Intonation is not completely clear, as in the next sentence, “It is largely because….”  The speaker is encouraged to slow the pace of speech to ensure each word is clearly articulated. There is some repetition, “palaces…which are…which….” Combined with unclear intonation so that the speaker’s ideas are not expressed. The ending seems to be a struggle, as the speaker begins one sentence, then switches to repeating a statement about lakes. Consider how to focus and plan a bit before speaking to avoid repetition and speak at a steady, even pace.

muneer bhat
24 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The opening sentence is clear but includes a preposition error as the speaker says “to current events,” rather than “about current events.” Preposition errors are one type of error that response raters pick up on and can lower a score, so it is worth the time to practice different preposition formations. Some speech is not clearly enunciated so it requires listener effort to understand the speaker’s ideas. There are some hesitations between ideas, but they do not interfere with meaning. The speaker is encouraged to focus on pacing and intonation, to make sure all words are clearly pronounced.

muneer bhat
24 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening sentence clearly establishes the location that is the subject of the response. There are some errors in grammar and plural formation, “touristes from all over the world came here,” rather than “tourists…come here.” There are some hesitations between statements and repetition of the word “here,” which signals a lack of elaboration and vocabulary. There are some minor pronunciation errors, the most obvious is “loud” for “love.” This is a strong response and the speaker is encouraged to focus on pronunciation and vocabulary.

25 January 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The introductory sentence is strong and clearly stated. The speaker uses an effective framework (two reasons). The elaboration could be stronger – there is some repetition in “use anywhere and any time.” There are some hesitations in transitioning between ideas, but these do not interfere with the clarity of the response.

25 January 2017 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker makes clear the location he’s describing. Vocabulary is strong and automatic. The speaker uses an effective framework (there are two reasons); Unfortunately the speaker runs of out of time, but the strength of the response and the depth of detail compensates. Well done.

Anupam Chaturvedi
21 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The beginning of the response is cut off, so it is not clear what the location is, until later in the response. Speech is relatively fluid and grammar is somewhat automatic, with minor errors such as dropped articles (a, an, the) as in “which is second largest beach…” instead of “…the second largest beach…” Vocabulary is typically strong, such as “crystal-clear blue water,” but there are pronunciation errors, such as “breech” for “beach,” which accumulate to interfere with meaning.

Lu Xia
20 January 2017 China 0 out of 4 Question1-1

There is sound, but no one speaks.  There is nothing to score.

20 January 2017 Japan 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker establishes the location in the first sentence, but listener effort is required, as the first few words beginning with “Recently…” are unclear and do not seem directly related to the prompt. The lack of clarity, difficulties with intonation and inconsistent pacing affect intelligibility of the response. Grammar is fairly automatic, with no stand-out errors. The response is generally sustained, but not fully elaborated. The speaker is encouraged to focus on intonation and clarity of speech.

Erma Santo
18 January 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker establishes the subject clearly and uses effective reasons. For example, she says, “anyone can …upload anything to the internet.” The use of concrete and specific supporting points makes the response stronger. The contrast to television is not clear as the speaker seems to say that anyone can say anything on television. The response is somewhat fluid and pronunciation is clear which somewhat compensates for the lack of clarity in the second half of the response.

Erma Santo
18 January 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The introduction is clear and the speaker establishes the main point of the response. There are hesitations that interfere with delivery as well as some repetition. The frequent pauses and repeated idea result in a truncated response that is incomplete.

Arthur Dias Duarte
20 January 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not completely clear that the speaker is responding to a prompt about current events. The opening statement, “…it is best to know about the events by the internet,” does not clearly express the subject. The speaker lists reasons for his opinion, including that the internet is faster than television, and refers to using Google to search for information. The speaker uses the phrase “heel time transmission,” and it is not clear to what he is referring. Because of the lack of clarity and missing details, this response is scored 2.

Arthur Dias Duarte
20 January 2017 Brazil 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Continue to work on pronunciation as words are not completely articulated, making it difficult to determine meaning. For example, the speaker says “cout” rather than “country,” and “state” rather than “statue.” There are significant hesitations in phrasing, making it difficult to understand the speaker’s main points. These pauses, combined with pronunciation errors, especially with the “r” sound affect clarity and fluidity of the response. The speaker is encouraged to focus on consonant pronunciation.

Yoonyoung Choi
18 January 2017 Japan 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker begins by stating the topic, which is always a good strategy. The speaker provides several clear and specific reasons for her preference for the internet. She uses strong framing structure (there are two reasons). There are some minor syntax errors such as, “I can see the news only I want to see..” instead of “I can see only the news I want to see.”  It is not completely clear what contrast the speaker makes between TV and the internet when she says, “the typical news by watching television…I don’t need to watch the news repeatedly through the internet.”  She makes a clear point about the lack of advertisements interrupting news on the internet. Because of the syntax errors, this score does not reach a 4.

Tatsuya T
17 January 2017 Japan 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker begins by stating the topic, which is always a good strategy. Speech is clear and details are specific. The speaker notes that the internet provides different ways to learn information, including chatrooms, etc, and that it is possible to search for information on the internet. There are some very minor grammatical/structural errors, such as, “you will learn about things, like what it is really like.” Overall, this is a strong response that would typically earn a top score.

Levi Mari Yu
14 January 2017 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speech is clear and vocabulary is strong. There are some hesitations and repetitions, such as, “Internet is best…source…is the best source of…” and “Media uses this platform…or internet…to give…to  give information…”  While the delivery is clear, these pauses and hesitations affect the pace and it is not fluid or automatic. Consider how to take the time between reading the prompt and delivering the response to quickly plan what to say in order to avoid these issues.

Levi Mari Yu
14 January 2017 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

Strong opening with clear speech. Strong vocabulary including “situated” and lists of specific water sports, which are clearly stated. There are minor grammatical errors  such as “a lot of people are enjoying in this island.” Most raters will likely overlook this type of error given the strength and clarity of delivery. It is suggested, however, that the speaker review grammatical structures before sitting for the actual test.

sofia ordonez
16 January 2017 Ecuador 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt with an opening sentence that restates the question. She names the location clearly and transitions into her explanation. There are some grammatical errors, such as “clearly water” instead of “clear water.” The speaker uses concrete details, such as describing the turtles on the island. There are some hesitations in speech and limits in vocabulary and grammatical clarity as “George Turtle…he was the most big turtle…” instead of George the Turtle was the biggest…. Overall the delivery is strong. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary and basic grammar structures. The word “beautiful” was overused, which can lead to a deduction in scoring, since it shows vocabulary limitations.

Luisa Barboza
12 January 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speech is directly related to the prompt and begins with a very clear statement of preference. Development is uneven and some ideas are not clearly developed, such as “and if you don’t like a new for example, if you don’t want you know about something…” There are errors in pronunciation and/or vocabulary here that obscure meaning. Hesitations and filler sounds interrupt delivery, requiring, at times, listener effort to piece together the main points.

Luisa Barboza
12 January 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker’s pace is strong and there is a level of confidence in the speech. Focus on organization as. It is not immediately clear what the location is from the start because the speaker jumps from idea to idea. There is some repetition, “a lot of beaches…famous beach….”  There is also some “filler” that interferes with meaning such as “actors…actress...and the things…”  as it is not clear how “things” relates to famous people. There are some pronunciation problems that interfere with meaning such as “…you can see the whole city through a *bound.””  Focus on clear articulation of words and maintaining steady delivery.

13 January 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker makes the topic clear from the start of the response. The speaker uses an effective frame work (there are a couple of reasons…) There are some dropped plural s-sounds, as in “current events.”  There are some pronunciation problems, such as in “learn” or in the phrase at the very end of the response which is not clearly spoken. The speaker some minimal filler sound and hesitation, leading to running out of time and an incomplete response.

11 January 2017 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

After a hesitant start, the speaker names a location and introduces strong “shell” language to frame the response (there are a couple reasons…);  It is not clear what the speaker is saying when he says, “first of all …it is the largest…? …of the whole world.”  This seems like a key point, but is lost in a missing word or obscured word.  There are frequent pronunciation errors, which individually would not be problematic, but as they accumulate, and combined with long hesitations and filler sounds, interrupt the pacing enough to interfere with meaning. Words like sea, shore, freedom and pronounced with incorrect or imprecise sounds so that sea sounds like seed, freedom like “reedom,” and shore sounds like show.  With such frequency, meaning and clarity are lost.

10 January 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question2-1

Overall a well developed response that shows a depth of detail and some strong vocabulary phrasing. There are however, phrases that seem to be missing words or are incomplete, such as “I know that there are….24 news on the television.”  This phrase has no clear meaning, which detracts overall from the effectiveness of the response. When referring to the internet, “…you’re the one that’s controlling it…not television.” It seems the speaker wanted to say that the user cannot control television, but this phrase says that television does not control the internet. Please be aware of environmental noise on future recordings as there were background sounds that obscured the speaker’s voice.

10 January 2017 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Articulation is clear. It is not immediately evident what the topic is. The speaker is reminded to begin with a topic sentence – the goal is to provide enough information so that a listener not familiar with the prompt will understand the purpose of the speech. The most consistent error is omitting the “s” in plurals, as in it “it is one of the most beautiful place…” instead of places. Phrasing is sometimes awkward, “according to me…it is a great tourist spot…a great tourist attraction…place.” Try to use the time before the recording begins to formulate a response so that you avoid repetition.

astha jain
5 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not immediately clear what the topic of the speaker’s response is until about 20 seconds into the response. It is important to establish the topic clearly at the start. The speaker supports her point in favor of news from the internet with an example of a politician’s death, which is strong evidence. It would be stronger with more development to explain that the information was not available on television and why that was the case. There are some minor grammatical errors, primarily in dropped articles “I guess best way to learn is through internet….minister died cause of heart of attack.”  These minor errors combined with the lack of elaborate lower this score to a three.

astha jain
5 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker addresses the prompt directly with some relevant details, including the details about the Taj Mahal. However, development is limited. There are some pauses and filler sounds in the response that interfere with fluidity and delivery. Pronunciation is clear and grammar is strong. The speaker is encouraged to focus on development and vocabulary. Consider using a “shell” in responses by introducing a topic and the idea that you’ll share two or three reasons for your opinion. This format is typically successful as it helps the speaker organize ideas and helps the rater identify key points.

MOHD ZAKI
7 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response begins a bit awkwardly with an error in vocabulary or phrasing, “obtain ones…about the current events…” The quality and depth of detail improves with a discussion of proxy servers and how to access information. There is some awkward phrasing, such as “TV’s not that much effective.”  But again, it is followed by strong elaboration and examples of countries in which television is controlled by governments that limit access to information. The speaker is encouraged to review his pacing as all information is delivered at the same pace, making it difficult for the listener to discern key details from other information.

MOHD ZAKI
7 January 2017 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response is directly related to the prompt. Speech is generally clear and pacing is overall, fine. There are some repetitions and fillers such as “uh.” The speaker stumbles a bit with the “two reason” and in the area that starts, “first the structure…the first … uh…like… the seven wonders of the world.” It requires listener effort to determine, eventually, that the speaker is referring to the Taj Mahal. This is likely more an issue of planning for speech, rather than vocabulary. The speaker is encouraged to take advantage of the planning time to consider specifically what to say.

Rodrigo Flores
4 January 2017 Mexico 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This response starts very strong as the speaker clearly states the topic in an introductory sentence. This response has very strong vocabulary (information uncensored about a lot of topics). The speech is fluid and moves effectively from one point to the next. The comparison between the internet and television is very clear and the point is made effectively (tv is censored and it is manipulated by governments). The speaker tends to drop articles (the, a, an), which is something to be aware of for future responses. It is not a significant error in this response.

Rodrigo Flores
4 January 2017 Mexico 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker has strong vocabulary, (architecture, pyramid, etc). He lacks fluidity in speaking. There are long pauses between ideas and the response is not truly coherent. Be sure to establish at the beginning what you’re talking about (restate the topic). Many successful speakers use a “shell” to organize their response such as saying there are three things tourists might enjoy, then naming and elaborating on them. The end cuts off of your response, leaving it incomplete. A listener who did not know the prompt would not know what you’re talking about.

Jackson Freire
3 January 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker engages immediately by establishing the topic. Speech is fluid but elaboration is somewhat limited. “There are a lot of people who can help you with it…and that’s it.”  There are some pauses in speech but they don’t interfere with delivery. The speaker is encouraged to focus on vocabulary so that he is able to develop his responses fully and earn the highest score.

Jackson Freire
3 January 2017 Brazil 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speech is clear and fluid. The speaker does not introduce the topic at the start of the response. Elaboration is limited and there are minor grammatical issues (will talk to you as well and recommend you…). The response focuses on the people present at the location and some limited discussion of the location. The speaker is encouraged to expand his vocabulary as more detailed elaboration will improve the score and the mechanics of the speech are excellent.

Akber Hussain
30 December 2016 Bangladesh 0 out of 4 Question2-1

The beginning of the response is relatively clear, however, background sounds drown out the speaker so it is impossible to score a complete response. The speaker is encouraged to find a quiet setting for recording responses. All background sounds, including conversations, pets, and television are picked up on the microphone.

Akber Hussain
30 December 2016 Bangladesh 0 out of 4 Question1-1

Unfortunately the sound quality of this response is poor and there seems to be quite a bit of background noise that makes it difficult to hear the speaker.

Alfu Laily
28 December 2016 Indonesia 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response is clearly related to the prompt and the speaker offers a strong introduction by pointing out that the internet provides “two-way” communication, while TV is only “one-way.”  There are some lapses in clarity, specifically after the speaker transitions with “furthermore.” The point made following that transition is not clearly articulated. There are lapses in articulation that interfere with meaning from that point to the end, but some strong vocabulary, such as “specifications,” is evident. The speaker is encouraged to slow her pace and clearly pronounce each word, avoiding the habit of rushing through phrases as that seems to be interfering with the clarity of delivery.

Alfu Laily
28 December 2016 Indonesia 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Response is generally well-paced and fluid. There are some phrasing errors, such as “is attractive to be visited…” which requires some effort to understand in the context of the response. There are also some grammatical errors, “Indonesia is tropical country that only have two seasons…”  These errors require listener effort to decode the speaker’s meaning. The last part of the response is not completely clear, “entertainment features that…” The response is mostly coherent despite these lapses in precision.

tanzy Z
27 December 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker is difficult to hear because of loud ambient noise and an echo in the microphone. The speaker is speaking about a lake, but it is not clear what details are introduced in the first few seconds.  There seems to be some repetition of phrases, but, since the speech is not clear, the rater cannot be certain. This response would likely be marked “TD” or technical difficulties in the actual test, as the sound quality is not clear enough for an accurate score.

Kashmi Lama
22 December 2016 Nepal 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker makes the claim at the start of the response. There are distracting grammatical errors, especially missing articles, such as “Internet is best way….” Instead of “The internet is the best way…” There is some repetition, “we are living in the modern era..the modern era…” These repetitions use time but don’t contribute to the score. As the response progresses the speaker speeds the pace of the speech, which results in additional errors in grammatical structure, such as “we can look more videos….”  The speaker is encouraged to moderate pace and be very aware of grammar.

Kashmi Lama
22 December 2016 Nepal 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Response directly addresses the prompt. Pacing is strong at the start, and there are few hesitations. There is a lack of clarity in some parts (visitor…stick around…). The speaker has included some specific details, but not all are clearly enunciated, so the elaboration is incomplete. Be aware of plural/singular formations, as the speaker sometimes uses singular “visitor” rather than “visitors.”  The speaker is encouraged to slow speaking and enunciate clearly as some content is lost because of the speed and clarity of speech.

Gino WU
14 December 2016 Taiwan 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Speech is very clear and well-articulated. Pace is generally appropriate, although there is some repetition (is a lake…is a lake…). There are some significant grammar errors which some raters might consider serious enough to lower the score to 2 (which locates at middle of Taiwan, instead of which is located in the middle of Taiwan). This type of error includes verb and preposition errors, which are considered the most serious types of errors. Some raters will give more consideration for the clear speech, but the overall score could end up 2.5. There is strong vocabulary, especially in phrases, “relaxing phenomena,” and “food is quite nice,” which are clear and descriptive.

8 December 2016 Albania 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The topic is clearly addressed and the speaker specifically to the prompt. Articulation is not always clear and pacing, with long pauses which interrupt deliver. There are multiple grammar errors throughout the response, such as “most of tourist like to come in ….” Which includes errors in verb form and preposition usage.  There are also idiomatic errors, such as “city of night’s lifestyle,” which interfere with clarity. Vocabulary is limited and the speaker repeats herself as she tries to find words to complete a thought or idea.

Jamal Hossain
2 December 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task, but development is limited. Speech is intelligible with significant listener effort because of pauses and filler sounds (like um) that interrupt phrasing and cause the response to be choppy and difficult to understand. Not all words are clearly articulated, and a listener who did not know the prompt would not be able to understand the speaker’s main point.  This score is between a 1 and a 2. The speaker is encouraged to review vocabulary, especially terms and phrases that can be used in multiple conversations, and continue to practice speaking.

antara mishra
1 December 2016 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The response directly addresses the prompt and presents a clear position. There are some minor vocabulary errors such as saying  “cause” instead of “because.” Ideas are not clearly developed and some sentences lack elaboration, such as “…we can not just watch what is going on…we can make a query on that thing you know…”  Sentences like this do not provide full development of ideas, which limits elaboration.   The response demonstrates limited range of vocabulary and grammar and seems to drift off topic when the speaker talks about “…make quizzes…and for gaining confidence in ourselves…” which is not related to whether the internet or television is the best source of current events. Elaboration is limited and sometimes demonstrates errors. Choppy pacing and unclear articulation interfere with meaning.

abu sufian
1 December 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task in the question. Speech is somewhat intelligible, but some phrases are not at all clear, such as “the popular tourist place with…is ….Temple…”   Several sentences are missing words, specifically verbs, such as “this place popular for….reasons.” Missing verbs significantly lower a score, as they indicate errors in vocabulary and in grammar. Sentences such as “second…charming….” Do not provide enough intelligible speech to develop meaning. The number of ideas presented is limited by these errors. Connections between ideas are not clear.

Ban Jojeja
2 December 2016 Yemen 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The response addressed the task, but development is limited by weak articulation and errors effecting coherence. Speech is basically intelligible, but listener effort is needed. Articulation is not clear and intonation is choppy. Meaning is compromised by long pauses and repetition of words or word sounds.  The number of ideas presented is limited, which indicates less elaboration. The main points are lost because of limits of vocabulary and expression, such as, “…you..world wide web can open   as much window you want…” There is a general idea in this sentence, but several errors in vocabulary, expression, and missing words interfere with meaning.

Ban Jojeja
2 December 2016 Yemen 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker is responding to the question. Speech  is basically intelligible, although some sections, such as the first full sentence, lack clear articulation. Delivery is choppy, such as “every year it is noted….there has been…it is increased in numbers). There are frequent minor grammatical errors, limiting full expression of ideas. Vocabulary is limited, which also limits expression. There is use of some transitional words, such as “furthermore,” but sentence structure is simplistic and not consistently accurate. The speaker is encouraged to review basic vocabulary and focus on words and phrases that can be applied in different prompts.

Andrey Solodov
29 November 2016 Russian Federation 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the question and makes a clear choice. Speech is clear and vocabulary is strong with words such as “bias, independent, variety.” The speaker uses specific examples and elaborates with strong details. There are minor grammatical errors, most noticeably a verb error. These do not interfere with clarity, but the speaker is cautioned to be aware of grammatical structure, as an accumulation of errors can lower the score.

Andrey Solodov
29 November 2016 Russian Federation 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. He names a specific location and elaborates with some broad details. There is strong vocabulary (great historical value) and accurate grammatical structure. Pacing is somewhat awkward and marked by pauses, leading to the speaker not finishing his response. To improve the score, work on planning within the allotted time before speaking and maintaining a steady, even pace.

daeng limpo
26 November 2016 Indonesia 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt and names a specific location. There is a variety of vocabulary used to describe different attractions in Bali. Grammatical structure is accurate and automatic. The speaker maintains a fluid pace and does not hesitate between ideas.

Rahul Jain
26 November 2016 India 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt and chooses internet. There are hesitations that interfere with fluidity and some issues with pronunciation, requiring listener effort to understand the speaker’s main points. Vocabulary is limited and there is not extended elaboration or explanation. Grammatical structures are awkward and demonstrate difficulty with basic structures. The speaker is encouraged to study vocabulary that can be applied to multiple prompts, such as introductory phrases.

Justina Grey
25 November 2016 Lithuania 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response is related to the task, but does not directly respond at the start, as the speaker begins by explaining a difference between television and the internet. Speech is generally intelligible and fluid. There are some pauses that interrupt the flow of information. There are some minor grammatical lapses, such as, “if you are confident and familiar…and used to using internet…” The mention of an “age gap” is not contextual, and would require elaboration, as it is not clear where this gap exists or how it is related to accessing information about current events.

Justina Grey
25 November 2016 Lithuania 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. Speech is clear and generally fluid. Minor lapses in grammatical structure, such as, “it’s been built 500 years ago.” Verb tense errors such as this tend to have a greater impact on a score than other types of errors. Elaboration is adequate as is vocabulary, although there is repetition of the word,  “beautiful.” A higher scoring response would show a greater range of vocabulary and elaboration in the description of the location.

Dhwani 123
24 November 2016 United States 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response fulfills the demands of the task. It is very intelligible and generally sustained. There are minor lapses, such as, “I can just watch…any news…of any current events,” or, “…it was not very much inconvenient to me,” but these do not affect overall intelligibility. The range of ideas is impressive, and the speaker  uses a specific example, of watching election results, to illustrate her point. If the lapses had been more frequent, this score would be 3, rather than 4.

Dhwani 123
24 November 2016 United States 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The response fulfills the demands of the task. It is very intelligible and sustained. Expression is fluid and clear. There are only minor pronunciation issues (such as souvenir), but these do not interfere with meaning. Grammar is correct and effective. Vocabulary shows range and the speech and sentence formations are automatic.

Nusrat Sume
23 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question2-1

It is not clear that the speaker has understood the task. She notes that the internet is the “best option” for. She goes on to discuss the ability to “like” a topic, which is not directly related to whether or not the internet is a good source of current events. She also notes that on the internet she can watch videos, which are like shows on television. Some minor grammatical errors, such as “internet has more verse option on it.” Speech is generally clear. The pace is choppy and meaning is not always cleared. There is a limited range of vocabulary.

Nusrat Sume
23 November 2016 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Speaker responds to directly to the prompt. Speech is generally clear, but there are sections that require effort, especially toward the end of the response. Response is somewhat automatic, but is marked by pauses and repetition. Information is generally relevant. Vocabulary is appropriate, but lacks precision or variety, such as the use of “visiting place” at the beginning of the response.

Ruchi Kasba
22 November 2016 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt and has a clear position. There are some minor grammatical errors such as “…is much more easier these days…” rather than the correct “is much easier.”  Diction is excellent and range of vocabulary and idiomatic expression is very good (“click and find the latest news”);  Pronunciation is strong and pacing is appropriate. The response is nuanced in the explanation, such as the point that one cannot click on television news to learn more about a topic.

Ruchi Kasba
22 November 2016 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Speech is fluid and vocabulary is appropriate and varied. Strong pronunciation, even with some of the trickier words such as beaches and lounges. Speech is automatic and intonation and pacing are excellent. There are minor hesitations and corrections, but these do not detract from the score.

Nahid Newaz
18 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. It is not clear, however, what the speaker is referring to as the “longest…..in the world.” This lack of clarity significantly limits the success of the response. Generally speech is very clear. Vocabulary is limited, such as “comfortable locations to see,” so that is not clear what the speaker refers to. Grammatical structures are basic. The speaker is encouraged to focus on the clarity of speech and on expanding vocabulary.

saiful islam
20 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The response addresses the task. Speech is basically intelligible, but significant effort is needed because articulation is unclear, sentences are choppy, and there is repetition of words and phrases. The limits in vocabulary prevent full development of the topic, so that it is not clear what the speaker’s argument is in support of the internet being the best way to access current events. The speaker is encouraged to focus on clarity of speech and fluid delivery that avoids pauses, filler sounds (uh) and repetition.

saiful islam
20 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task, but is limited. Speech is intelligible, but considerable effort is required because articulation is unclear. Meaning is obscured by pacing and pronunciation. Only basic sentence structures are used successfully, and only short, repeated or common phrases are clear, such as “ideal location” or “situated in…” To improve the score the speaker is encouraged to slow speech and enunciate clearly. Avoid hesitations and fillers that interfere with meaning and pacing.

priya nakka
17 November 2016 United States 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The response directly to the prompt. Speech is clear and somewhat fluid. There are minor idiomatic errors such as “internet” instead of “the internet,” or “and I have to do the job” instead of “and I have to work….” Some development is superfluous to the question, so that it is more filler than information that elaborates on the main point.  There are pauses and some false starts in speech. To improve the score, avoid pauses and review idiomatic phrasing.

17 November 2016 United States 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response fulfills the demands of the task with minor errors in vocabulary and approach, such as saying, “I would prefer…” rather than “I would recommend…” to introduce the response. Speech is clear and generally fluid. There are several hesitations in speech, filled with “uh” that interrupt delivery but do not affect overall intelligibility of speech in a significant way. The ideas are generally coherent and grammatical structures show only minor errors. While some raters may consider this a “low 4” score, it would typically receive a “high 3.” To improve the score focus on fluidity and pacing. Slow down, eliminate hesitations and fillers between words, and focus on crisp intonation.

17 November 2016 United States 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response fulfills the demands of the task with only minor lapses. It is very intelligible and speech is sustained, detailed and coherent. Speech is fluid and pronunciation is clear. An effort is made in intonation and vocabulary is rich and detailed with words like “biased” and “media.” The speaker adds rich detail and explanation showing sophistication in understanding the question and developing a response. Clearly a top-scoring response.

aniie shr
17 November 2016 United States 0 out of 4 Question1-1

There is no audible speaking in this response.

Has Rah
17 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The response is connected to the task and contains some intelligible speech. There are issues with overall coherence caused by errors in pronunciation in intonation so that it takes considerable effort to understand the speaker. Problems with intelligibility obscure meaning, such as in “for example..sometimes..uh..television...”  The second half of the response is generally unclear. Keep in mind that the rater is encouraged to listen just once to the response, so issues in clarity of speech can lower the score considerable. Work on fluidity and avoiding pauses between words and on pronouncing words crisply. Speech should be as near to automatic as possible, so that it does not seem that the speaker is “searching” for every word.

Has Rah
17 November 2016 Bangladesh 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Speech is relatively clear. Sentences are marked by frequent hesitations and pauses which the speaker fills with “uh,” slowing and interrupting delivery. There are repetitions of words and phrases that further interrupt delivery such as “tourists go there…to see…to see…”  It is not clear what the tourists see, “longest…in the world.” Words missed through unclear pronunciation definitely lower the score. There is some strong vocabulary such as “traditional” and “historical.” To improve the score focus on the fluidity of delivery. Phrasing should be close to automatic, lacking pauses and vocal filler after almost every word.

Yoonyoung Choi
16 November 2016 Japan 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The first word, the name of the location, is not clearly spoken, making it difficult to understand the point of the response. There are long pauses and missing words, such as, “most popular place…in Korea…that visitors…it is most traditional place in Korea…” There is rich vocabulary in phrases such as “long and storied history.” These sorts of phrases are can be applied to different prompts, so are worth the effort to learn. Good organization in stating there are “two reasons” but the actual reasons are not fully articulated.

Pacing is choppy and pronunciation is not always clear. To improve the score, focus first and foremost on pacing and long pauses that interrupt single thoughts.

fathima fahmiya
17 November 2016 India 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt in the opening sentence. Be aware of a minor idiomatic issue: it is “the internet,” rather than “internet.”  Speech is generally clear and there is strong vocabulary in phrases such as  “medium of communication.” Pacing in this response is adequate. Intonation lacks expression so that there are no vocal cues to the beginnings and ends of sentences, which can interfere with clarity. To ensure all responses fall within the top scoring range focus on pacing – slow down speech, and on vocal cues in tone, so that speech is not monotone.

fathima fahmiya
17 November 2016 India 4 out of 4 Question1-1

Speech is clear and fluid. The speaker directly addresses the prompt. Be cognizant of transitions between first language and English, as sometimes clarity is lost. Pacing is fairly automatic, but lacks expression. The speech is very rapid, but without intonation. Vocabulary is rich with words like “historical importance” and “marvelous structure.” This is a low 4/ high 3 scoring response. Because the intonation is monotone and the pace is very fast, some raters will struggle to understand all words or ideas. To ensure a strong score, focus on expression in speech and on slowing the pace.

priya nakka
17 November 2016 United States 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds to the prompt. Speech is generally clear and somewhat fluid. Pay attention to parts of the response when switching from the native language for a place name and back to English. That transition sometimes muddies the clarity of the English. There are minor idiomatic errors, such as “the India” instead of  “India,” or “wonders of the universe” instead of “wonders of the world.” There are some long pauses in speech and false starts. To improve the score, review idiomatic expressions and practice fluidity or moving from point to point without hesitation.

Rahul Jain
15 November 2016 India 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker is clearly responding to the prompt. Speech is not fluid, as there are pauses that interrupt delivery. Some words are not clearly pronounced so that the rater cannot clearly understand what he is saying.  Language errors, such as “why visitor would visit this place…” omit articles, and result in choppy, unclear delivery. The speaker pauses with fillers (uh, um), and runs out of time. To improve the score, work on slowing delivery and intonating clearly. It can be difficult to switch from saying the name of a location in one’s native language back to English. Try to be deliberate so that the rater can hear the transition.

manish maharjan
14 November 2016 Nepal 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker is clearly responding to the prompt. The beginning of the response is not clear, so the rater cannot tell if the speaker is comparing the internet and television.  Speech is very rapid and not always clear.  There is some strong vocabulary (TV is closely watched and governed by the government but internet is a free medium);  The speaker has sophisticated ideas. To improve the score work on slowing the pace of response and focusing on minor issues such as plurals (adding –s to the end) and articles (the, a).

manish maharjan
14 November 2016 Nepal 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker responds to the prompt. Diction is not clear and delivery is very rapid with little intonation, making it difficult to discern all words. There are some minor word errors (stair, instead of stairs; monkey, instead of monkeys);  There are some missing articles (from top of the hill); To improve the score, the speaker should focus on speaking more slowly and clearly enunciating words. Be attentive to plurals (adding –s to the end) and to articles (a, the).

Hana Hamzic
14 November 2016 Bosnia And Herzegovina 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker responds directly to the prompt with fluid, well-elaborated discussion. She uses complex sentence structures such as dependent clauses (…while on television I don’t have as much of a choice). Vocabulary is rich (censoring, read the opinions of the population…); the mention of well-known media outlines (Guardian, Huffington Post) shows deep understanding of the topic. Clearly a top-scoring response.

Hana Hamzic
14 November 2016 Bosnia And Herzegovina 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response. The speaker responds directly to the prompt. Delivery is fluid and speech is clear and well articulated. Vocabulary is very strong (rich cultural heritage, …architecture that stems from..). There is a range of expression and the speaker covers several aspects of the city.  Clearly a top-scoring response.

Annie Ni
14 November 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker addresses the prompt directly. An idiomatic issue to remember – in English, one says “the internet.” This is a small detail, but if there are other idiomatic errors, it can bring down the score. The speech is generally fluid, but there are pauses and awkward phrases (…and you can learn about information…).  Good range of vocabulary (diverse, biased opinions). Work on pronunciation of “you,” which is not clear. The word “information” is always singular, so saying “informations” will always be an error.  This response is a “high” 3, which means addressing some of the minor issues, such as article and plural errors will raise it to a 4.

Annie Ni
14 November 2016 China 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker addresses the prompt directly. Speech is fluid and demonstrates a range of vocabulary. Enunciation is adequate. Words like “museums” are not spoken clearly. Remember that the rater will listen just once, so she will not have the opportunity to review the response if words are not clear. The speaker covers museums and food with details. This response is a “low” 4, which means some raters, if they did not hear clearly, might consider it a “high” 3 score. To make sure the score is a 4, work on enunciation of words.

Asif Anik
11 November 2016 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Be sure to speak clearly and include relevant details. The response begins with, “In my place…” what is the place you’re referring to?

The framework, “because of two reasons” is strong and shows organization in the response. However, the reasons are not fully developed. You say that the market is popular for two reasons, the first is that the cinema is “very popular.” This is not providing additional elaboration, but repeating a reason without elaboration.

Vocabulary is limited, as marked by the frequent repetition of the word “popular.”  The fact that the word “popular” is part of the prompt makes the overuse of the word somewhat a problem, as the speaker is not able to demonstrate use of vocabulary independent of the question.

Delivery is choppy, marked by pauses and uneven pacing. Language use is adequate but not consistently accurate, and includes several minor errors in verb use and articles (such as the or a).

Harold Chan
13 November 2016 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question2-1

A strong opening to the response that showed the speaker understood the question and is able to engage in conversation about the topic. There are some minor language errors. For example, the speaker says “medias” rather than “media.” There are also missing verbs, such as, “…as far as I concerned” instead of, “as far as I’m or I am concerned…”

A minor idiomatic error is that in English one refers to the internet rather than internet. The response gets a bit confused toward the end when the speaker says “ a lot of people can give their comment…in which you can tackle more…you can talk more…” It is not completely clear what the speaker is referring to relevant to the topic…express deeper…”  Remember the question refers to how one can “learn about” current events, rather than react to.

Language is fluid and vocabulary is adequate if not expansive. There are some pauses in delivery but they do not interfere significantly with meaning.

Harold Chan
13 November 2016 Philippines 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Some minor article and preposition errors, such as “and by this Philippines becomes famous tourist destination every summer…” instead of, “and because of this Philippines becomes a famous…” There are also some minor language errors such as “this place has a lot of tourist people…to visit..”

Delivery is clear and fluid. Vocabulary is somewhat limited, as noted by the repetition of some words. The speaker ran out of time and was not able to fully develop ideas. This is likely due to some longer pauses and repetitions. Focus on range of vocabulary and articles and prepositions as these errors, when there are more than one or two, can lower one’s score.

April Presto
10 November 2016 Saudi Arabia 4 out of 4 Question2-1

An excellent response that not only demonstrates strong speaking skills but a nuanced understanding of the topic. Vocabulary is exceptional with standout words and phrases, such as, "the internet is the decisive technology of the information age."  The topic is richly explored, especially given the time limit. Speech is clear and fluid with excellent language control. A perfect example of a top-scoring response.

April Presto
10 November 2016 Saudi Arabia 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response. The speaker responds directly to the prompt in a clear, fluid, and exceptionally well-elaborated description of a park in her city. Vocabulary is exceptional, including complex phrases such as, "monument enshrining his remains." Grammar is very strong and speech is clear and well-paced. This is clearly a top-scoring response.

7 November 2016 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question2-1

The opening does not make clear that the speaker is confident about the topic, "to get to know about current events it is very important..." The syntax is confusing.
The contrast between television's "live feeds" and publishing on the internet is not clearly explained, some words are not enunciated clearly.
Try to avoid frequent filler (uhhh) which interrupts fluidity and limits vocabulary. Grammatical structures are limited but understandable. Vocabulary is somewhat limited. Consider studying some words and phrases that can be used for transitions in multiple topics (for the following reasons, to elaborate, for example); These phrases can improve delivery and fluidity.

7 November 2016 Bangladesh 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The opening sentence clearly identifies the topic. Speech is relatively fluid, but is marked with several minor errors, such as "you can travel with car...by plane..." It is not clear if you're referring to traveling on the beach or to the beach.
Work on eliminating pauses and fillers such as "uh" which interrupt delivery. It makes more sense to pause for an extra moment before speaking rather than hesitate throughout the response.

QIAN ZHU
6 November 2016 China 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The speaker begins with a clear statement of position. The fluidity and range drop of following the opening with errors such as "it saves the time..." and has "much more choice than..." It is not clear what the speaker means by "compare the members through the internet..." Range of vocabulary is limited and ideas are vaguely expressed. Focus on fluidity and avoiding long pauses between ideas which interrupts the response.

QIAN ZHU
6 November 2016 China 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Response is related to the task. Delivery is limited. The ideas are not fully developed and the response is punctuated with long pauses. The main points seem to be that the location is beautiful and a good place "for student to learn...many history," which is not a clearly expressed idea. Details and support are minimal. To improve consider practicing vocabulary words that can be applied to many different tasks, including those used to describe locations, activities, and people.

anan cheng
6 November 2016 China 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is a strong response. The speaker begins by establishing the question and elaborates with details - that people check the internet when they wake up, and that the internet is updated constantly. There are very minor grammatical errors, such as "internet become a more important part" instead of "the internet has become..."  These minor errors do not interfere with meaning and do not interrupt delivery.

anan cheng
6 November 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question1-1

Be sure to begin clearly - state the main point you'll be making in a single clear sentence as you begin. The beginning of the response is very unclear.  There are some excellent details in this response. Some minor pronunciation issues such as "beaches." Be careful irregular plurals. Scenery is always singular, one does not say "sceneries." These minor errors, when they accumulate distract from meaning and can lower the score.

6 November 2016 China 2 out of 4 Question2-1

Delivery is fluid and clear. However, there is a misunderstanding of the topic. The topic refers to "current events" which means news, such as would appear in a newspaper or be presented in a television news program. Your response refers to "distance learning" programs which is not the same.
There is some confusion: "Internet is much more active by watching television..." it is not clear what is meant.
Try to avoid repeating words or phrases to self correct. After a minor error, try to move on.

6 November 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task. The delivery is generally clear and somewhat fluid. There are some issues with language use "locates at the west..." instead of "located in the west..."
Vocabulary is somewhat limited so that repetition is evident, although there are some strong vocabulary choices such as "premium brands." The topic is coherent and somewhat sustained.  Attention to grammatical and idiomatic structures will improve the score.

Qiao Huang
5 November 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question2-1

Be sure to make clear what you're responding to in the first sentence. "I prefer television..." does not tell the listener that you are speaking specifically about news and current events. The topic is further muddled when you say "most TV shows are officially provided by famous medial." It remains unclear if you're talking about current events, which leaves doubt with the rater as to your understanding of the question.  Delivery, pacing, and vocabulary are strong. There are no disruptive errors in grammar. The area of focus should be demonstrating clear understanding.

Qiao Huang
5 November 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly responds to the prompt. Pacing is appropriate; speech is not always clear, for example the words leading up to "delicious food" and "university life" are not clearly spoken. Keep in mind the TOEFL raters are encouraged to listen only once to the response, so the rater will not listen a second time to better understand what is said.
Otherwise, there are excellent details in this response, including different types of food and the details about why the area is a good spot for those interested in the history of China.

Jeyleen Blanco
4 November 2016 Colombia 3 out of 4 Question2-1

As in her response to the first prompt the speaker begins in a way that does not make clear what she's talking about. One of the main rubric points is to "address the task..." and the best way to meet that requirement and improve the score is to begin with a thesis or a statement that makes clear both the topic and the speaker's opinion.
Vocabulary shows some limitations: "You can find a lot of stuff" and "You can find real stuff" neither of which communicates a specific idea.
The ending seems to confuse the issue. At first the speaker recommends the internet, but ends by saying, "If you really want to learn about stuff I recommend newspapers or scientific stuff." This statement contradicts the initial opinion.

Jeyleen Blanco
4 November 2016 Colombia 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response directly addresses the task and is generally clear. The response shows some hesitation and weakness in grammar/vocabulary. For example, the opening, "In my country it is really popular..."  The phrasing is awkward and a listener unfamiliar with the prompt would not immediately understand what the speaker is talking about.
Vocabulary is somewhat limited and there are several minor grammar errors. The organization is not strong, as ideas seem unconnected, such as the last statement, "also..food is really good all the time..." the sentence doesn't offer a conclusion and is not detailed.

Marko Vandev
4 November 2016 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic Of 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response addresses the task directly and shows some strong vocabulary: "modify" and "browsing," and "objective."
Speech is generally clear and fluid and expressive. Pacing is somewhat choppy as the reader repeats words and ideas to self-correct. The response is coherent and is focused on relevant information.
This is a very high "3" score, but the repetition and pacing errors lower the score. The speaker is encouraged to avoid repeating words or phrases in an effort to self-correct.

Marko Vandev
4 November 2016 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic Of 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The response is appropriate to the task and is developed with details that are specific and somewhat detailed. Speech is generally clear, but lacks fluidity as the speaker repeats words and sounds and hesitates. This is most evident at the start of the response.
Grammar and vocabulary is fairly automatic, but with some stumbles, such as "filled with sea....sea species...sea world..."  All information is relevant and the organization is coherent.
To improve his score the speaker should work on the fluidity of speech and try to avoid correcting the same word or idea repeatedly, as that typically lowers the score.

Maria Calderon
5 November 2016 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question2-1

The response clearly fulfills the demands of the task. The speaker introduces the topic and previews the evidence she'll provide. She uses effective transitions, such as "first and second" and "furthermore."  The topic is developed with concrete reasons, such as "there's a lot of resources" and "every time I do my research about what is happening in Syria..."  This reference to specific research strengthens the response.

Maria Calderon
5 November 2016 Philippines 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The response addresses the task directly. Speech is well-paced and the speaker moves from one point to the next.
Speech is generally clear, however, there is some minor difficulty at the very start of the response: "One of the most popular...tourist attraction is...."  It would benefit the speaker to slow the rate of speech slightly so that she has time to clearly enunciate every word.

Leo Lyu
5 November 2016 Japan 4 out of 4 Question2-1

This is a strong response with good details. The speaker shows excellent vocabulary with words like "bias" and "resources," and phrases like "think critically and independently."
The response is nuanced and develops ideas.
There was a minor idiomatic issue: the speaker says "internet" rather than the idiomatic "the internet."  This error is not significant and does not lower the score from the top range.

Leo Lyu
5 November 2016 Japan 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is a very clearly spoken and well-developed response. The speaker demonstrates a range of vocabulary and fluid speaking that transitions effectively from one idea to the next. The speaker ran out of time, which did not lower the score on this response, but could be an issue on different prompts. Additional practice will help the speaker manage responding within the allotted time.

Tatsuya T
28 October 2016 Japan 4 out of 4 Question1-1

The response clearly fulfills the demands of the task. There are minor lapses: "transportations" instead of "transportation."

Work on enunciation. Some words are not clear such as "popular."  The phrase "there are many different kinds of routes of trains..."  is not idiomatic. It should be "there are many train routes."

This  borders on a 3/4 line because of some delivery issues and language use.

Abdurrahman Imam Subki
12 October 2016 Austria 2 out of 4 Question2-1

The response is connected to the task, but the speaker has not clearly understood the question. The purpose of the response was to argue that the best way to learn about current events was either through the internet, or by watching television. The speaker responds, "Yes..." and explains the benefits of both. This error in understanding keeps the response from earning a score higher than 2.

Abdurrahman Imam Subki
10 October 2016 Austria 2 out of 4 Question1-1

Speech is basically intelligible. There are some pronunciation issues (museum, culinary);

Limited range of vocabulary and grammar is not automatic or fully controlled as in the sentence "We can find hundreds kind of food."  Native speakers would say: "We can find hundreds of different kinds of food."   Sentence structure was short and very simple and ideas were not fully developed.

The response is directly connected to the task. Work on developing ideas with details and more elaboration to demonstrate vocabulary.

Sally Yang
4 October 2016 China 3 out of 4 Question1-1

The speaker directly addresses the prompt. Speech is generally clear and somewhat fluid. There are minor difficulties in intonation and grammar. For example, "because of the several reasons..." This phrase uses the article "the" incorrectly.

Some phrasing is awkward or unclear, such as "beautiful clothes and other cosmetics." This sentence says that clothes are a kind of cosmetic, which is not accurate.

The response is generally sustained, although some words, such as "popular" are used repeatedly.

Sharon 李
30 September 2016 China 4 out of 4 Question1-1

This is an excellent response that will earn the top score of 4. The speaker very clearly responds to the task. Speech and delivery are clear and fluid. The speaker includes specific details, rather than broad generalizations, and introduces relevant evidence to explain why Beijing is a good tourist destination.

Vanessa Pan
30 September 2016 Germany 3 out of 4 Question1-1

This is a strong response at the 3 level. There are minor grammatical errors (one and one half our driving, rather than drive).

The response fulfills the requirements of the task and delivery is generally clear and somewhat fluid. There are minor pauses and difficulties with pronunciation. The language use is very deliberate, giving, at times, the impression that the speaker is thinking of the correct phrasing.

### NON MEMBERS Only access homepage contents.

#### FREE No signup required

• View homepage contents
• Take free TOEFL speaking mock-tests
• Review sound recordings
• Share submissions
• View and listen to other user's submissions
• Take full TOEFL speaking mock-tests

### FREE TRIAL MEMBERS Get personal feedback on two free trial independent mock tests.

#### FREE Signup required

• View homepage contents
• Take free TOEFL speaking mock-tests
• Review sound recordings
• Share submissions
• View and listen to other user's submissions
• Take full TOEFL speaking mock-tests

### PAID MEMBERS Access Ace's full features and take individual or full-length tests to be personally graded.

#### $3/$18 Per question/Per test(6 questions)

• View homepage contents
• Take free TOEFL speaking mock-tests
• Review sound recordings