IELTS Advice!

[nic0218]

I started a thread a few weeks ago called: Ielts Rant. It's basically started with me having a moan about how I had got 6.5 for my writing section, whilst scoring 9.0's on the other sections! As a teacher & native speaker, I didn't understand it!

I then discovered that there were many others out there who were either in the same boat, (re-sitting Ielts), or were just about to take their Ielts and were worried.

Well, 2 weeks ago I re-sat the test and I got my results today. L-8.5, R-9.0, W-9.0, S-9.0!

I know that if I had looked a bit more closely at the format that Ielts want for the writing etc, and practised this, I wouldn't have had to re-sit the test.

On my original thread, a very kind chap/chapess called- "thelongwait" replied and as an IELTS examiner gave me some invaluable advice -particularly on the writing section.

 

I thought it would be useful to those of you on the forum who are about to do their IELTS to collate all the advice I got, with the hope that you won't have to go through what I did.

 

Basically IELTS has 4 sections, (Listening, Reading, Writing, Speaking). If you're a native speaker, you'll get 9.0 on your speaking section. It's the easiest section, as all you have to do is talk about yourself, where you live etc. Then they'll ask you a general question that you have to speak about for 2 mins, ( discuss a small business that you know about, a visit to a river etc). You would have to sit there and be mute to fail this section!

 

The listening section, is relatively easy, but you have to concentrate! You'll listen to taped conversations, people with different English speaking accents etc. If you read ahead, in the time they give you, you'll see what you need to listen out for. After that it's just concentrating and remembering to check your spelling!

 

The reading section can be quite hard, particularly the academic test. You get 3 academic papers and have to answer questions. The answers are either multiple choice, fill in the missing words, or "true, false or not given". My best advice is to go through some practise reading papers to give you an idea of what to expect.

You can get them for free on: www.ielts-exam.net, www.canadavisa.com/ielts, or IELTS practise books are available at the library.

Remember to split your time- 20 mins for each reading section, and give yourself time to transfer your answers to the answer sheet. Again, check your spelling!

 

For the writing section you'll get 2 sections. The 1st asks you to look at some form of data and comment. The 2nd will ask you to give your opinion/comment about a general trend. EG- "does TV have more of an influence on children's development than their family?". The 1st section needs to be a min of 150 words & it's not asking your opinion, you're merely stating what you can see on the graph etc. Make sure that you have a brief intro, a few paragraphs on what data you can see,(make comparisions etc), then a concluding paragraph. There are some good example questions on both sections on www.ielts-exam.net. YOU NEED TO PRACTISE! Most of us have been out of Uni/school for awhile and you need to get back into the swing of writing in a certain format. The 1st section should be completed in 20mins & carries less points than the all important 2nd section.

 

For the 2nd writing section, it's again practising using the format that IELTS require.

I did a dummy IELTS paper and "thelongwait" marked it for me. I've included it below:

 

Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important

professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 

In the world of professional sport, players are no longer classified by how much they earn in a month or year, but how much they earn in a week. Some argue that because their working lifespan is so short, sports men and women need to earn substantially more than their average (non-sporting) counterpart. Others argue that there are far more deserving, skilled workers that should be earning a similar sum.

 

Recently football records in the Premiership were again broken by a footballer, bought for £35 million. He can expect be earn around £6 million pounds a year and that’s excluding further income from various sponsorship deals. At the tender age of 22, he could conceivably play for another 10 years, earning more money than the average worker could hope to in 40 years. However, there is also a real chance that he could be plagued by injury, shortening not only his working life, but also his earning power. Whilst the average professional will work to increase their yearly pay over several years, a professional sportsperson’s pay can decrease due to age or injury.

 

The argument against professional sports players earning such vast amounts of money, must stem from a comparison of jobs and skills in other sectors. Should a professional golfer really earn millions a year whilst a cancer research scientist earns a tiny proportion of this? It could also be that being paid for your natural ability rankles those who have had to study and train for years before they are allowed to work in their profession. In a society where working long hours is considered to be a necessary part of your career, why should someone who seems to work for a few hours at a time be paid so much?

 

In conclusion, I believe that there are valid points in both arguments. A professional sports person has an unstable, unpredictable work life. They could work, at their peak, for a mere 10 years; equally they could be retired due to injury in just 2 years. Earning significantly more than the average professional must be necessary because of these factors. However I do believe that we should reward those professionals, whose work contributes significantly to society. Doctors, nurses, teachers etc deserve to be paid as much as footballers, even if this is merely a wish and not a practicality.

 

 

 

This is how "thelongwait" scored my essay:

for task response i would give you an 8. it's a great response which is totally relevant to the question. the format is correct, you have a good introduction which rewords the question and you use a formal writing style.

this question really has 3 parts (the argument for, and against, and your opinion.) It's important to give fairly equal amounts of space to each of these parts, which you did. this score is subjective and your answer is possibly a 9, but it's very rare to score 9 for this aspect, as 9 means nothing could usefully be added - and you can nearly always think of something you could add. perhaps for example you could have mentioned the long/intense training a sportsperson requires. for style in ielts, avoid using contractions. thus instead of 'that's', use 'that is', or 'which is.' instead of 'etc' use 'and so on' because 'etc' is an abbreviation. (You didn't use any other abbreviations, but students often write eg or m or km, kg, it is preferable to write these out in full.)

for coherence/cohesion (organisation) I would score an 8, possibly a 9. paragraphing is good. 4-6 paragraphs is about the right amount for 250 words. since your essay is 381 words you could possibly have had more paragraphs and split for example the second paragraph. the main rule is there should be a new topic for each paragraph. one sentence is not a paragraph, therefore each paragraph must contain more than 1 sentence, even if it's a very long sentence. You used a good range of link words (however/whilst/because of/even if/in conclusion) But you repeated the word 'however', perhaps you could replace it with another word that means the same thing (although/despite/yet) and you could add even more link words like: firstly, next, due to, despite, in order to, the final point to consider is... Aim for about 12 of these words. The logical order is good, it was easy to follow your essay.

lexical resource score (vocabulary): 9

a great range of vocab including some rare words like 'rankles', 'mere,' 'lifespan.' Again, this is subjective, another examiner may only give an 8. it's rare to get a 9 for this aspect - you need a pretty wide range of vocab.

I didn't see any spelling mistakes or repetition of vocabulary.

grammar score 9:

accurate grammar, a range of sentence structures, some complex sentences with relative clauses (who/whose, etc.) there's a mistake in line 1 of pargraph 2, but i suspect this is a typing error. you wrote: he can expect be earn, it should be 'to' earn.

so overall, you're looking at at least an 8.5, possibly a 9.

 

I was trying to work out how you could possibly have scored a 6.5 in the previous exam. might you have misinterpreted the question or included something irrelevant? that might mean a 4 or 5 for response. some students focus too much on one aspect of the question and don't answer all parts, or go off on a tangent about something they feel strongly about but isn't totally relevant to the question. if you forgot paragraphing, you would score only 5 for coherence - ielts is very strict on paragraphing. perhaps a few spelling mistakes would give you 8 for vocabulary or 7 if they felt you repeated the same word a few times or the vocab wasn't relevant to the question they set, with a 9 for grammar. average these out and i suppose it could be a 6.5, but it still seems very strange.

 

 

*I really hope this helps, and if anyone else wants to add any advice to this thread that would be great!

[Guest wastrel]

Congrats that you made it in your second IELTS.

 

I think you have given some good advice.

you are right that knowing the format and practicing is very important.

[paddymacs]

I started a thread a few weeks ago called: Ielts Rant. It's basically started with me having a moan about how I had got 6.5 for my writing section, whilst scoring 9.0's on the other sections! As a teacher & native speaker, I didn't understand it!

I then discovered that there were many others out there who were either in the same boat, (re-sitting Ielts), or were just about to take their Ielts and were worried.

Well, 2 weeks ago I re-sat the test and I got my results today. L-8.5, R-9.0, W-9.0, S-9.0!

I know that if I had looked a bit more closely at the format that Ielts want for the writing etc, and practised this, I wouldn't have had to re-sit the test.

On my original thread, a very kind chap/chapess called- "thelongwait" replied and as an IELTS examiner gave me some invaluable advice -particularly on the writing section.

 

I thought it would be useful to those of you on the forum who are about to do their IELTS to collate all the advice I got, with the hope that you won't have to go through what I did.

 

Basically IELTS has 4 sections, (Listening, Reading, Writing, Speaking). If you're a native speaker, you'll get 9.0 on your speaking section. It's the easiest section, as all you have to do is talk about yourself, where you live etc. Then they'll ask you a general question that you have to speak about for 2 mins, ( discuss a small business that you know about, a visit to a river etc). You would have to sit there and be mute to fail this section!

 

The listening section, is relatively easy, but you have to concentrate! You'll listen to taped conversations, people with different English speaking accents etc. If you read ahead, in the time they give you, you'll see what you need to listen out for. After that it's just concentrating and remembering to check your spelling!

 

The reading section can be quite hard, particularly the academic test. You get 3 academic papers and have to answer questions. The answers are either multiple choice, fill in the missing words, or "true, false or not given". My best advice is to go through some practise reading papers to give you an idea of what to expect.

You can get them for free on: www.ielts-exam.net, www.canadavisa.com/ielts, or IELTS practise books are available at the library.

Remember to split your time- 20 mins for each reading section, and give yourself time to transfer your answers to the answer sheet. Again, check your spelling!

 

For the writing section you'll get 2 sections. The 1st asks you to look at some form of data and comment. The 2nd will ask you to give your opinion/comment about a general trend. EG- "does TV have more of an influence on children's development than their family?". The 1st section needs to be a min of 150 words & it's not asking your opinion, you're merely stating what you can see on the graph etc. Make sure that you have a brief intro, a few paragraphs on what data you can see,(make comparisions etc), then a concluding paragraph. There are some good example questions on both sections on www.ielts-exam.net. YOU NEED TO PRACTISE! Most of us have been out of Uni/school for awhile and you need to get back into the swing of writing in a certain format. The 1st section should be completed in 20mins & carries less points than the all important 2nd section.

 

For the 2nd writing section, it's again practising using the format that IELTS require.

I did a dummy IELTS paper and "thelongwait" marked it for me. I've included it below:

 

Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important

professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 

In the world of professional sport, players are no longer classified by how much they earn in a month or year, but how much they earn in a week. Some argue that because their working lifespan is so short, sports men and women need to earn substantially more than their average (non-sporting) counterpart. Others argue that there are far more deserving, skilled workers that should be earning a similar sum.

 

Recently football records in the Premiership were again broken by a footballer, bought for £35 million. He can expect be earn around £6 million pounds a year and that’s excluding further income from various sponsorship deals. At the tender age of 22, he could conceivably play for another 10 years, earning more money than the average worker could hope to in 40 years. However, there is also a real chance that he could be plagued by injury, shortening not only his working life, but also his earning power. Whilst the average professional will work to increase their yearly pay over several years, a professional sportsperson’s pay can decrease due to age or injury.

 

The argument against professional sports players earning such vast amounts of money, must stem from a comparison of jobs and skills in other sectors. Should a professional golfer really earn millions a year whilst a cancer research scientist earns a tiny proportion of this? It could also be that being paid for your natural ability rankles those who have had to study and train for years before they are allowed to work in their profession. In a society where working long hours is considered to be a necessary part of your career, why should someone who seems to work for a few hours at a time be paid so much?

 

In conclusion, I believe that there are valid points in both arguments. A professional sports person has an unstable, unpredictable work life. They could work, at their peak, for a mere 10 years; equally they could be retired due to injury in just 2 years. Earning significantly more than the average professional must be necessary because of these factors. However I do believe that we should reward those professionals, whose work contributes significantly to society. Doctors, nurses, teachers etc deserve to be paid as much as footballers, even if this is merely a wish and not a practicality.

 

 

 

This is how "thelongwait" scored my essay:

for task response i would give you an 8. it's a great response which is totally relevant to the question. the format is correct, you have a good introduction which rewords the question and you use a formal writing style.

this question really has 3 parts (the argument for, and against, and your opinion.) It's important to give fairly equal amounts of space to each of these parts, which you did. this score is subjective and your answer is possibly a 9, but it's very rare to score 9 for this aspect, as 9 means nothing could usefully be added - and you can nearly always think of something you could add. perhaps for example you could have mentioned the long/intense training a sportsperson requires. for style in ielts, avoid using contractions. thus instead of 'that's', use 'that is', or 'which is.' instead of 'etc' use 'and so on' because 'etc' is an abbreviation. (You didn't use any other abbreviations, but students often write eg or m or km, kg, it is preferable to write these out in full.)

for coherence/cohesion (organisation) I would score an 8, possibly a 9. paragraphing is good. 4-6 paragraphs is about the right amount for 250 words. since your essay is 381 words you could possibly have had more paragraphs and split for example the second paragraph. the main rule is there should be a new topic for each paragraph. one sentence is not a paragraph, therefore each paragraph must contain more than 1 sentence, even if it's a very long sentence. You used a good range of link words (however/whilst/because of/even if/in conclusion) But you repeated the word 'however', perhaps you could replace it with another word that means the same thing (although/despite/yet) and you could add even more link words like: firstly, next, due to, despite, in order to, the final point to consider is... Aim for about 12 of these words. The logical order is good, it was easy to follow your essay.

lexical resource score (vocabulary): 9

a great range of vocab including some rare words like 'rankles', 'mere,' 'lifespan.' Again, this is subjective, another examiner may only give an 8. it's rare to get a 9 for this aspect - you need a pretty wide range of vocab.

I didn't see any spelling mistakes or repetition of vocabulary.

grammar score 9:

accurate grammar, a range of sentence structures, some complex sentences with relative clauses (who/whose, etc.) there's a mistake in line 1 of pargraph 2, but i suspect this is a typing error. you wrote: he can expect be earn, it should be 'to' earn.

so overall, you're looking at at least an 8.5, possibly a 9.

 

I was trying to work out how you could possibly have scored a 6.5 in the previous exam. might you have misinterpreted the question or included something irrelevant? that might mean a 4 or 5 for response. some students focus too much on one aspect of the question and don't answer all parts, or go off on a tangent about something they feel strongly about but isn't totally relevant to the question. if you forgot paragraphing, you would score only 5 for coherence - ielts is very strict on paragraphing. perhaps a few spelling mistakes would give you 8 for vocabulary or 7 if they felt you repeated the same word a few times or the vocab wasn't relevant to the question they set, with a 9 for grammar. average these out and i suppose it could be a 6.5, but it still seems very strange.

 

 

*I really hope this helps, and if anyone else wants to add any advice to this thread that would be great!

Well done you on getting it even if you did have to do it twice and thanks for sharing all that information. My Hubby is doing his in a few weeks so these pointers will really help.

Did you have to repeat the whole test again or just that section? Did you have to pay full amount again?

[nic0218]

Well done you on getting it even if you did have to do it twice and thanks for sharing all that information. My Hubby is doing his in a few weeks so these pointers will really help.

Did you have to repeat the whole test again or just that section? Did you have to pay full amount again?

 

Yep, you have to do the whole test again, and pay the whole fee again!

[paddymacs]

Oh dear whata a shame!

Well at least its behind you now and good luck with your application now Im sure it will have been worth it!

[Guest NeilEB]

That's a really helpful opening post Nic - I have my IELTS on Saturday and it's the writing I am most nervous about, purely becuase there is no way of practising it....

 

Ahh well, I've timed myself on writing speed and it seems adequate, so I just have to hope I can score at least a 7!

[nic0218]

That's a really helpful opening post Nic - I have my IELTS on Saturday and it's the writing I am most nervous about, purely becuase there is no way of practising it....

 

Ahh well, I've timed myself on writing speed and it seems adequate, so I just have to hope I can score at least a 7!

 

Don't worry, you'll be fine! Other good tips that the IELTS chap gave me for the writing, are: don't use contractions- like "that's", write "that is", and don't use abbreviations like -"etc"- use ".. and so on".

It's almost old fashioned, the format that they like to see in the writing test. As long as you have a clear argument, not too many spelling mistakes etc, you'll get your 7.0.

Best of luck for Saturday!

Nic

[Guest scotsnurse]

Fantastic post. Thank you so much for this info.

 

Much appreciated.

[Guest NeilEB]

Sorry another question (can you tell I'm stressing?!)

 

Apparently I'm only allowed to bring in pencils, pens and erasers into the Listening, Reading and Writing exams (which have no breaks). How about a pencil sharpener?

 

Also, I've just found out that the Reading & Listening tests are marked by computer, which is why you have to use a pencil. I assume handwriting then has to be fairly neat? And am I allowed to write in capitals, or will that be marked down?

 

Finally I assume that the writing test can be written in pen? Do crossing-outs count against you? And is there anywhere to make notes, or will the examiner see notes as well?

[pandv_2000]

Hi Neil

 

I didn't take a sharpener - just a couple of pencils. They had spares if you needed them. I wrote my answers on the listening test in capitals and on the reading test normally and scored 9 for each so it doesn't matter.

 

You have the choice whether to wirte in pen or pencil for the writing test. I wrote in pen and hada few crossings out but it didn't affect the score. I wrote notes on the question paper and put my answer into the answer booklet.

[nic0218]

Sorry another question (can you tell I'm stressing?!)

 

Apparently I'm only allowed to bring in pencils, pens and erasers into the Listening, Reading and Writing exams (which have no breaks). How about a pencil sharpener?

 

Also, I've just found out that the Reading & Listening tests are marked by computer, which is why you have to use a pencil. I assume handwriting then has to be fairly neat? And am I allowed to write in capitals, or will that be marked down?

 

Finally I assume that the writing test can be written in pen? Do crossing-outs count against you? And is there anywhere to make notes, or will the examiner see notes as well?

 

Ok..I brought a pencil sharpener & that seemed to be fine, no one commented. You can also bring some water with you, but it has to be in a clear plastic bottle ( remember you don't get toilet breaks.. so don't glug 2 litres of the stuff!!!)

 

I believe the reading & listening are "read" by a computer, but also by humans! I wrote in capitals both times & that seems to be fine, they do penalise you for spelling mistakes.

You can use pen or pencil for the writing tasks. I would really recommend a pencil as it allows you rub out sentences/spelling mistakes rather than crossing out loads of bits. (I've no idea if they penalise you for crossing's out).

The writing task comes as 2 separate sheets. One is basically a lined booklet where you write your answers the other is your question booklet. You can jot down notes on the question booklet- it's taken in, but they make it clear that the examiner only looks at the answer booklet.

Hope that answers everything, and please don't worry, as long as you've had a bit of a practise you'll be fine!

Nic

[Guest NeilEB]

Ok, so I sat my test on Saturday and thought I'd give some feedback.

 

It's been a while since I sat an exam, so it was a bit nerve-wracking for me - thankfully the registration process was simple, and the fact I seemed to be the only native speaker there gave me a bit of confidence.

 

After registration we were split into 3 groups. 1 for General, and 2 for academic. We left our bags in the cloakroom, but they didn't seem to be too strict on what you bottles you took in with you. Some people had lucozade, some left labels on etc.

 

Listening Test came first and I was thankful for the practise papers I had done - it really gave me a lot of comfort as I wasn't surprised by anything. I probably got a couple of questions wrong, but I reckon I got at least 35 out of 40. I had plenty of time to check my answers and to 'neaten' my handwriting.

 

Reading test was next, and again the practice papers helped. As expected the 'True / False / Not Given' section was really hard (and I would dispute some of the questions personally), but am confident I got at least 35 / 40.

 

The writing was always going to be the least confident test, as it is so hard to practise. However I wrote more then enough (had to ask for extra paper even), so hopefully I did ok.

 

Then there was a long break till my listening. The 'examiner' annoyed me as she kept nodding and 'hmm-ing' the whole time I was speaking, which was really off-putting, but I suppose I should take it as a good sign. I ran out of things to say in the 1-2 minute section (I talk very quickly), but hopefully I spoke for at least a minute.....Strangely she was open about the marking sheet, so I saw the scores everybody else got, which I found a bit strange.

 

So now I wait - here are some words of advice though - make of them what you will...

 

1) Please do some practice papers. Even if you are a native speaker, it will get you used to the format. Someone on the day missed the last 6 questions of the reading paper as she didn't realise they were there. It also help you to learn that the instruction on the number of words is important (in the Listening and Reading Tests) - for the sake of £10, it's worth getting

 

2) In the speaking test, don't worry about the actual answers you give. It's not an interview, they wont mark you down for opinions that don't match theirs. Fluency, vocabulary, and coherence is what they are looking for.

 

3) That goes for the writing as well (particularly the general one) - don't worry about the answer, just concentrate on communicating your opinion clearly - and make sure to argue both sides (not that it was applicable in my exam).

 

4) Don't drink too much! You go to the toilet in your own time, and frankly, time is better spent doing the paper

[tdk43]

Ok, so I sat my test on Saturday and thought I'd give some feedback.

 

It's been a while since I sat an exam, so it was a bit nerve-wracking for me - thankfully the registration process was simple, and the fact I seemed to be the only native speaker there gave me a bit of confidence.

 

After registration we were split into 3 groups. 1 for General, and 2 for academic. We left our bags in the cloakroom, but they didn't seem to be too strict on what you bottles you took in with you. Some people had lucozade, some left labels on etc.

 

Listening Test came first and I was thankful for the practise papers I had done - it really gave me a lot of comfort as I wasn't surprised by anything. I probably got a couple of questions wrong, but I reckon I got at least 35 out of 40. I had plenty of time to check my answers and to 'neaten' my handwriting.

 

Reading test was next, and again the practice papers helped. As expected the 'True / False / Not Given' section was really hard (and I would dispute some of the questions personally), but am confident I got at least 35 / 40.

 

The writing was always going to be the least confident test, as it is so hard to practise. However I wrote more then enough (had to ask for extra paper even), so hopefully I did ok.

 

Then there was a long break till my listening. The 'examiner' annoyed me as she kept nodding and 'hmm-ing' the whole time I was speaking, which was really off-putting, but I suppose I should take it as a good sign. I ran out of things to say in the 1-2 minute section (I talk very quickly), but hopefully I spoke for at least a minute.....Strangely she was open about the marking sheet, so I saw the scores everybody else got, which I found a bit strange.

 

So now I wait - here are some words of advice though - make of them what you will...

 

1) Please do some practice papers. Even if you are a native speaker, it will get you used to the format. Someone on the day missed the last 6 questions of the reading paper as she didn't realise they were there. It also help you to learn that the instruction on the number of words is important (in the Listening and Reading Tests) - for the sake of £10, it's worth getting

 

2) In the speaking test, don't worry about the actual answers you give. It's not an interview, they wont mark you down for opinions that don't match theirs. Fluency, vocabulary, and coherence is what they are looking for.

 

3) That goes for the writing as well (particularly the general one) - don't worry about the answer, just concentrate on communicating your opinion clearly - and make sure to argue both sides (not that it was applicable in my exam).

 

4) Don't drink too much! You go to the toilet in your own time, and frankly, time is better spent doing the paper

Thanks so much for the reply. I was wondering what you had to write with, was it a pen or pencil?

I have mine on sat, and am so nervous i can't tell you,

Donna

[Guest NeilEB]

Thanks so much for the reply. I was wondering what you had to write with, was it a pen or pencil?

I have mine on sat, and am so nervous i can't tell you,

Donna

 

For the reading and listening you MUST use pencil (so they can be read by computer).

 

For the writing you can use either - I personally used pencil as I thought erasing was better then lots of crossing out, but the choice is yours!