Speaking: Narrating a Near-Miss and Defending a Sidewalk Ban
Your speaking prompt is a four-step written sequence, not a picture: Step 1, a cyclist rides fast along a sidewalk. Step 2, a pedestrian wearing headphones steps out from behind a parked van. Step 3, the cyclist veers sharply; a crate of oranges falls. Step 4, the cyclist and pedestrian talk; the pedestrian points at a 'No Cycling' sign. You must narrate the sequence for 60 seconds, then answer: 'Should electric scooters be allowed on sidewalks?' You have 20 seconds to prepare. You are unsure whether the pedestrian was injured, because the sequence does not show injury. You also do not know why the cyclist was on the sidewalk. The examiner will not ask clarifying questions during your narration. After the narration, the examiner may challenge you with: 'But some riders are disabled; would a ban be fair?'
1. How should you narrate Step 3 without inventing an injury?
Read the worked answer
Narrate only what the sequence supports. Say: 'The cyclist veers sharply to avoid the pedestrian, and the crate of oranges falls.' Do not say 'the pedestrian is badly injured' or 'the cyclist breaks the pedestrian's arm'; the sequence does not show injury. If you need to fill time, describe visible reactions: 'The pedestrian steps back and points at the sign.' This is not hedging for its own sake; it keeps your narration accurate and gives you a natural transition to the sign and the rule. In a speaking test, inventing a serious injury is a factual overreach that can distort the later opinion answer.
2. How should you structure the opinion answer after the narration?
Read the worked answer
Structure: concession, criterion, conclusion. 'Sidewalk bans for e-scooters are reasonable in crowded areas because the risk to pedestrians is real, as the near-miss shows. But a blanket ban may be unfair to riders with mobility impairments, so the better policy is speed limits, designated lanes, and enforcement, with exceptions assessed case by case.' This concedes the safety concern and the fairness challenge, then gives a criterion, risk reduction without excluding disabled users, rather than simply repeating 'ban them.' It also answers the examiner's follow-up directly.
3. What should you do if you blank on the word 'swerve'?
Read the worked answer
Paraphrase and keep going. If 'swerve' is missing, say 'turns quickly to avoid the pedestrian' or 'changes direction sharply.' Do not stop to apologize or ask for the word. A one-second pause is fine; a long search for vocabulary damages fluency more than a simpler phrase. You can also use the fall as the next event: 'The cyclist loses balance, and the crate falls.' The examiner is judging communication, not vocabulary display, so a plain paraphrase is the safer judgement call.