NEW TOEFL Speaking Task Practice Test #7

Instructions

In this part of the new TOEFL (January 2026 update) Speaking module you participate in a simulated conversation with a prerecorded interviewer about general or academic topics. You answer four questions, starting with factual/personal questions and progressing to opinion questions requiring elaboration and support.

Time Limit: 45 seconds per question

Scoring: 0-5 scale

Score 5: Fully successful (on-topic, well-elaborated, good pace, intelligible, accurate grammar/vocabulary)
Score 4: Generally successful (on-topic, elaborated, good pace generally, mostly intelligible, adequate grammar/vocabulary)
Score 3: Partially successful (generally on-topic, limited elaboration, choppy pace, intelligibility sometimes affected, limited grammar/vocabulary)
Score 2: Mostly unsuccessful (minimally connected, little relevant elaboration, intelligibility limited, very limited range)
Score 1: Unsuccessful (vaguely connected, mostly unintelligible, isolated words/phrases)
Score 0: No response, entirely unintelligible, no English, or unconnected to prompt

Interview

Question 1

Transcript

Question 1: What environmental issue concerns you the most, and why?

Sample Response

Sample High-Level Response

Sample Response: The environmental issue that concerns me most is plastic pollution, particularly in our oceans. I’m concerned about this because the scale of the problem is enormous and it’s affecting marine ecosystems in devastating ways. Every year, millions of tons of plastic waste end up in the ocean, where it breaks down into microplastics that are consumed by marine animals. This not only harms the animals directly but also enters the food chain, eventually affecting humans who eat seafood. I’ve seen documentaries showing sea turtles with plastic straws stuck in their noses and birds with stomachs full of plastic debris, and these images really affected me. What’s particularly frustrating is that much of this plastic is single-use items that we use for just minutes but persist in the environment for hundreds of years. Unlike climate change, which feels abstract and distant to many people, plastic pollution is something we can directly see and our individual choices about consumption can make a real difference.

Explanation

Explanation: This response earns a high score through its passionate, well-informed discussion of a specific environmental issue. The speaker doesn’t just name an issue but explains why it’s concerning with multiple specific points including scale, ecosystem impact, and human health implications. The inclusion of concrete examples like sea turtles and birds makes the issue vivid and shows emotional engagement with the topic. The response demonstrates understanding of the scientific dimension by mentioning microplastics and food chain contamination. The comparison between single-use duration and environmental persistence effectively highlights the irrationality of the problem. The conclusion comparing plastic pollution to climate change shows analytical thinking about what makes environmental issues feel urgent to people. The language is appropriately concerned and descriptive without being overly emotional. The organization flows logically from stating the issue to explaining impacts to providing examples to noting frustrating aspects to discussing why this issue is particularly compelling.

Question 2

Transcript

Question 2: What actions do you personally take to reduce your environmental impact?

Sample Response

Sample High-Level Response

Sample Response: I try to take several actions to reduce my environmental footprint. First, I’ve eliminated most single-use plastics from my life by carrying a reusable water bottle, bringing cloth bags when shopping, and using reusable containers for food storage. Second, I try to minimize food waste by planning meals carefully and composting food scraps. I’ve learned that food waste in landfills produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas, so composting is actually quite important. Third, I’ve reduced my meat consumption, particularly beef, because livestock farming has a huge environmental impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, water use, and land use. I still eat meat occasionally, but I’ve shifted toward more plant-based meals. I also try to buy second-hand items when possible rather than always purchasing new things, which reduces manufacturing demand. For transportation, I bike or use public transit when feasible rather than driving. Are these actions enough to solve environmental problems? No, but I believe individual actions matter both for their direct impact and for influencing social norms.

Explanation

Explanation: This response demonstrates strong environmental awareness through its comprehensive list of concrete personal actions. Each action is briefly explained rather than just listed, with specific details like carrying a reusable water bottle or composting food scraps. The response shows scientific knowledge by mentioning methane from food waste and the environmental impact of livestock farming, indicating the actions are based on understanding rather than just following trends. The speaker shows realistic self-awareness by noting continued occasional meat consumption rather than claiming perfection. The variety of actions across different domains like consumption, diet, purchasing, and transportation shows systematic thinking about environmental impact. The concluding reflection on whether individual actions are enough shows critical thinking and awareness of scale while still defending their value. The language is clear and informative with appropriate environmental vocabulary used naturally. The organization is logical, working through different categories of action before reflecting on their significance.

Advertisement

Question 3

Transcript

Question 3: Some people argue that environmental protection should not be prioritized if it hurts the economy or costs jobs. How would you respond to this argument?

Sample Response

Sample High-Level Response

Sample Response: I would respectfully disagree with this argument for several reasons. First, I think it presents a false choice between the environment and the economy. In reality, environmental protection and economic prosperity can work together. Clean energy sectors like solar and wind are actually creating many new jobs, often more than they’re displacing in fossil fuel industries. Second, environmental degradation has enormous economic costs that we’re already paying, such as damage from extreme weather events, healthcare costs from air pollution, and agricultural losses from drought and changing climate patterns. Preventing environmental damage is ultimately cheaper than dealing with its consequences. Third, this argument takes a very short-term view. Yes, some environmental regulations might create short-term costs or require economic transitions, but in the long term, we can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy environment. Clean air, water, and stable climate are fundamental to economic activity. I think the better question is not whether to protect the environment but how to do it in ways that minimize disruption and create new opportunities for workers.

Explanation

Explanation: This response demonstrates excellent argumentative speaking through its systematic dismantling of the stated position with multiple well-reasoned counterarguments. The speaker respectfully acknowledges the argument before disagreeing, showing appropriate academic discourse style. Each counterargument is substantive and specific, such as citing job creation in clean energy and economic costs of environmental damage with concrete examples. The response shows sophisticated economic thinking by distinguishing short-term costs from long-term necessities and by recognizing environmental resources as economic fundamentals. The reframing of the question at the end shows advanced analytical ability, moving the discussion from whether to how. The language is appropriately formal for policy argumentation while remaining clear and accessible. The response demonstrates ability to engage with opposing viewpoints constructively and comprehensively. The organization is exemplary with clear structure using first, second, and third to present distinct arguments before synthesizing with a reframed conclusion.

Question 4

Transcript

Question 4: What do you think is the most effective way to encourage people to care about environmental issues and take action?

Sample Response

Sample High-Level Response

Sample Response: I think the most effective approach involves multiple strategies working together. First, education is crucial, but it needs to be the right kind of education. Simply presenting scary facts about environmental destruction can make people feel hopeless and paralyzed. Instead, education should help people understand the connections between their daily lives and environmental impacts while emphasizing that solutions exist and individual actions matter. Second, making sustainable choices the easy and affordable choice is important. People are more likely to use public transportation if it’s convenient and reliable, or buy sustainable products if they’re competitively priced. We can’t rely solely on people making sacrifices. Third, positive social pressure and social proof can be powerful. When people see their friends, neighbors, or celebrities adopting sustainable behaviors, they’re more likely to do the same. Finally, I think connecting environmental issues to what people already care about is effective. For example, some people might care about environmental protection because they love outdoor recreation, others because they worry about their children’s future, and others for religious or ethical reasons. Meeting people where they are rather than expecting everyone to care in the same way makes the message more compelling.

Explanation

Explanation: This response achieves a top score through its sophisticated, multipronged approach to a complex question about behavior change. The speaker demonstrates psychological insight by recognizing that scary facts can backfire by creating hopelessness, showing nuanced understanding of human motivation. Each strategy is explained with reasoning about why it works, such as noting that convenience matters more than just awareness for behavior change. The discussion of social proof shows knowledge of social psychology. The point about connecting to existing values rather than creating new ones shows deep understanding of effective communication and persuasion. The response acknowledges that no single approach is sufficient, showing realistic thinking about complex social change. The language is analytical and appropriately academic for discussing behavioral science and communication strategy. The organization is excellent with clear structure presenting multiple complementary strategies. The response demonstrates ability to think systematically about how to achieve social and behavioral change on environmental issues.

NEW TOEFL Speaking Module Interviews

OUR TOEFL SHOP

“TOEFL Vocabulary Quiz #1: Core Words [Premium]” has been added to your cart. View cart

TOEFL Preparation

Vocabulary

Meet Your Tutor Before You Decide

Watch a few of my videos to see how I approach teaching and what you can expect.

Ready to Start Your English IELTS TOEFL SAT Journey?

CHALLENGE YOURSELF.
TAKE IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL.

Leave a CommentCancel reply