Speaking: Joining a Dominated Group Discussion
Three C1 candidates have four minutes to discuss the motion 'Remote work has damaged workplace innovation.' Candidate A has 90 seconds of notes and has prepared three statistics. Candidate B speaks first and talks for 70 seconds without pause. Candidate C has not spoken. The examiner has signalled that the discussion is halfway through. Candidate A's notes include 'Stanford 2022: 13% productivity rise' and 'but junior staff mentorship falls'. Candidate A disagrees with the motion but wants to build on B's point about isolation. Candidate A also notices they have said 'everyone knows' twice. The task requires initiating, interrupting politely, and developing a point with evidence.
1. Candidate A has 20 seconds before the midpoint. What should they do with their speaking turn, and why? Give the exact opening move and the reasoning.
Read the worked answer
A should interrupt politely, acknowledge B, add one substantive point, and bring C in. An exact opening could be: 'Can I build on that, B, because I think the isolation point actually cuts both ways?' Then A can say that isolation may hurt informal innovation but that the 13% productivity rise suggests output can improve. Finally: 'C, do you see the mentorship issue differently?' The reasoning is that the task rewards initiating and developing a point, not just waiting for a gap. Acknowledging B avoids the impression of contradiction, while the question to C repairs the participation imbalance. A should not spend the turn listing all three statistics; one statistic tied to the argument is stronger than a recital.
2. Why is 'everyone knows' risky at C1, and what should A say instead? Give a replacement and explain its effect.
Read the worked answer
'Everyone knows' is risky because it presents an opinion as uncontested common knowledge, invites challenge, and adds no evidence. At C1 the candidate is expected to hedge, concede complexity, and support claims. A better replacement is: 'The evidence is mixed, but several studies suggest that junior staff lose informal mentoring when teams are fully remote.' This phrasing signals a qualified claim, leaves room for counter-evidence, and connects to A's mentorship note. The effect is that A sounds analytical rather than assertive. The candidate should also avoid repeating the phrase twice, because repetition makes the overgeneralisation more visible to the examiner.
3. How should A use the Stanford 13% figure without letting it overpower the discussion?
Read the worked answer
A should use the figure as one piece of evidence inside an argument, not as a headline. For example: 'One Stanford study found a 13% productivity rise, but that does not settle innovation; productivity and innovation are different outcomes, and the same study notes weaker mentorship.' This does three things: it introduces evidence, it concedes a limit, and it links back to the motion. The candidate should avoid implying that a single study proves remote work is good or bad. In a group discussion, a statistic is most useful when it opens a line of reasoning that others can respond to, not when it closes the discussion.