IELTS Speaking Part 3: Technology, communication
6 Part 3 discussion questions on technology, communication, with developed sample answers of the kind Part 3 expects.
What are the differences between the technology of the past and that of today?
The most striking difference is speed and accessibility – past technology often required physical presence or delayed transmission, whereas today’s technology is instant and global. A letter in the 19th century took weeks to cross an ocean; today, an email reaches the other side of the planet in seconds. Past technology was also more specialised and expensive, owned by institutions rather than individuals – think of a single telephone per village versus today’s smartphone in every pocket. Another key difference is interactivity: past technologies like radio or early television were one-way broadcasts, while modern digital tools allow two-way, many-to-many communication. Finally, the pace of change itself has accelerated; technologies from the 1950s (like black-and-white TV) remained relevant for decades, while today’s apps feel outdated within months. This constant flux brings excitement but also a kind of collective attention deficit.
What are the differences between making friends in real life and online?
Making friends in real life usually happens through shared physical contexts – school, work, neighbourhoods – and involves gradual, low-stakes interactions over time. You see their body language, hear their tone, and develop trust through a thousand small, unspoken exchanges. Online friendship, by contrast, can be more intentional and interest-driven; you might bond over a niche hobby or a forum discussion with someone you would never meet otherwise. However, online friendships lack the richness of non-verbal cues and often move faster – intense sharing early on can create a false sense of intimacy. They also face the risk of deception or ghosting, as the cost of disappearing is much lower online. Both forms have value: real-life friends anchor you in place, while online friends can expand your horizons. Ideally, the strongest bonds blend both, moving from screen to in-person when possible.
Does technological development have a negative impact on communication among people?
It can, but it is not inevitable – the impact depends heavily on how we use the tools. On the negative side, constant phone use has eroded the art of uninterrupted conversation; many people now scroll during meals or look at screens instead of making eye contact. Text-based communication lacks tone, leading to misunderstandings and conflicts that would never happen face-to-face. There is also the phenomenon of “phubbing” – phone snubbing – which damages relationships by making the other person feel less important than a device. However, technology also enables communication that would otherwise be impossible, keeping long-distance families connected or allowing introverts to express themselves more comfortably. The problem is not technology itself but the displacement of richer forms of communication by poorer, faster ones. Mindfulness and digital boundaries can mitigate the negatives without rejecting the positives.
Do you think technology unites or separates people?
It does both, often simultaneously, and that duality is the central paradox of our age. Technology unites by dissolving geographical barriers – a grandmother can video-call her grandchild across continents, and activists can coordinate globally. It unites by creating new communities based on shared interests, from rare diseases to obscure music genres. Yet it also separates by filtering us into echo chambers, where we only see people who agree with us, polarising society. It separates by substituting shallow digital interactions for deep, physical presence – we have more “friends” but feel more lonely. The same platform that reunites old classmates can also be used to bully or exclude someone. In the end, technology is a magnifying glass: it amplifies both our best instincts to connect and our worst impulses to withdraw or attack. The outcome depends on design choices and, more importantly, on how we choose to use it.
What effects does technology have on people's relationships?
Technology has both strengthened and weakened relationships in different dimensions. On the positive side, it allows for constant, lightweight contact – a funny meme sent at 2 a.m. can be a small but real expression of affection. It also provides tools for coordinating busy lives, from shared calendars to grocery lists, reducing friction in household relationships. For long-distance couples or friends, video calls and messaging apps have made separation far less painful than in the pre-internet era. On the negative side, technology can introduce jealousy (who is that person they’re texting?) and distract from quality time. Many couples report feeling “alone together” – each scrolling on a phone while sitting on the same sofa. The overall effect is that relationships now require active management of technology boundaries, something previous generations never had to think about. Without those boundaries, convenience can slowly erode intimacy.
What are the differences between talking with friends online and face-to-face?
Face-to-face conversation is multi-sensory: you see micro-expressions, hear tone and pitch, and pick up on subtle pauses or shifts in posture. This richness allows for real-time adjustment – you can tell immediately if a joke landed badly or if your friend is distracted. In-person talk also creates shared physical memories: the café where you laughed, the park bench where you had a serious talk. Online conversation, especially text-based, strips away most of that data, leaving only words. This can be liberating for careful, thoughtful communication, but it is also prone to misinterpretation. Video calls restore some visual cues but still lack the full-body presence and the accidental, magical moments of in-person time – bumping into someone, a spontaneous hug, or just sitting in comfortable silence. Both have their place, but deep emotional bonding still happens more reliably when you can actually reach out and touch someone’s arm.
Reading a model answer is not the same as saying one. The sample above shows what a strong Part 3 answer sounds like. What it cannot tell you is how yours sounds — whether you hesitate, repeat the question back, or run out of things to say at forty seconds.
You can record an answer to this exact question and get it marked on fluency and coherence, lexical resource, grammatical range and pronunciation — the same four criteria the examiner uses.
Common questions
How is Part 3 different from Part 1?
Part 1 is about you; Part 3 is about people in general. The questions move to society, causes and consequences, and the answers are expected to be longer and more developed — an opinion plus a reason plus an example.
What if I have no opinion on the question?
You are not marked on the opinion, so pick one and support it. Saying you have never thought about it and stopping there leaves the examiner nothing to assess.
How long does Part 3 last?
Four to five minutes. The topics develop out of your Part 2 card, so the discussion is usually connected to what you just described.
Model answers written and reviewed by The English All-in-One IELTS team. They are teaching models showing what each band looks like, not real candidate scripts.