The short answer
CAE Speaking Part 3 is not a test of who says the most. It is a test of how well two people build a conversation together. The candidates who do well respond to what their partner has just said, add to it or challenge it, and then hand the conversation back. In the final minute, they compare options before they decide. The candidates who struggle take turns giving short speeches that never connect, then agree on the first option just to finish.
This article explains why that happens, what the examiner means by interaction, and three simple moves that turn two monologues into a real discussion.
What CAE Speaking Part 3 actually asks for
Part 3 is the collaborative task. It lasts about three minutes for a pair. You and your partner are given a question to discuss, with a set of written prompts to help you, and you talk about it together for about two minutes. The examiner then asks a second question that asks you to reach a decision, and you have about one minute to do it (Cambridge English teacher guide for C1 Advanced Speaking).
Cambridge describes what candidates should be doing as exchanging ideas, justifying opinions, agreeing or disagreeing, and reaching a decision through negotiation. Every one of those is something you do with another person, not to them. You cannot negotiate with someone you are not listening to.
That is why Part 3 feels different from the rest of the test. In Part 2 you speak alone. In Part 3, you are still marked on your own performance, but a large part of that performance is how well you interact with someone you have probably never met.
Two monologues and a quick yes
Listen to a typical Part 3 and you will often hear the same pattern. Candidate A talks about one prompt for twenty seconds. Candidate B says “Yes, I agree” and talks about a different prompt for twenty seconds. Candidate A moves on to a third. Nobody responds to what the other person actually said. It sounds like a discussion, but it is really two people taking turns to give short speeches.
Then the examiner asks for a decision, and one candidate says, “I think the first one is the most important.” The other says, “Yes, I agree.” And the minute is over in fifteen seconds.
This happens for a simple reason. Most candidates prepare for Part 3 alone, or with a teacher. They learn to talk about the prompts, but they never practise responding to a real partner who says something unexpected. So in the exam, they fall back on what they have practised: their own ideas, delivered in turn. Agreeing quickly feels polite and safe, and it ends the uncomfortable part sooner.
It is one of the most common patterns I see in CAE candidates, and like most of them, it has nothing to do with missing language. Almost every C1 candidate knows how to say “That’s a good point, but…”. The problem is that they use it as a filler before their own speech, rather than as a genuine response.
What the examiner means by interaction
One of the five things the assessor marks is Interactive Communication. At the top band for C1 Advanced, Cambridge describes a candidate who “interacts with ease, linking contributions to those of other speakers” and who “widens the scope of the interaction and negotiates towards an outcome” (Cambridge C1 Advanced teacher guide).
Three phrases in that description matter most. Linking contributions to those of other speakers: your idea connects to what your partner just said, not to what you planned to say. Widens the scope: you open the conversation up with a new angle, a consequence, or a question back to your partner. Negotiates towards an outcome: you reach the decision together, by weighing options, not by accepting the first one.
Two monologues fail the first test. A quick yes fails the third. Neither is a language problem.
In terms of the Four Pillars, Part 3 tests Flexibility hardest: adapting to where your partner takes the conversation. It also tests Natural Expression: sounding like someone genuinely discussing an idea, not someone reciting prepared points.
The three moves of real interaction
A real discussion has a rhythm. Each turn does three small things, and once you notice them, you can practise them.
1. Respond to what was just said
Begin your turn by picking up something specific from your partner, not with a general “Yes, I agree”. For example: “You mentioned cost, and I think that’s probably the biggest factor for most families…” This one habit is what makes the examiner hear a conversation rather than a queue.
2. Add or challenge
Then move it forward. Add a reason, an example or a consequence, or politely push back: “…although I’m not sure it matters as much for younger people, who might care more about convenience.” Disagreeing is not rude in Part 3. A gentle challenge is one of the clearest ways to show interaction.
3. Hand it back
End your turn by inviting your partner in, so the conversation doesn’t stall: “What do you think, would that be true where you live?” A short question is enough. It also takes pressure off you, because you are no longer trying to fill the time alone.
Respond, add, hand back. If every turn does those three things, you will rarely give a monologue, because a monologue has no first or last step.
Your body is part of the conversation
This is the part most candidates never practise. In my coaching, one of the clearest signs of a candidate who has only ever practised with a teacher is that in Part 3 they talk to the examiner, not to their partner. They look at the examiner, wait for approval, and barely glance at the person they are supposed to be discussing with.
Real conversation is physical. Turn slightly towards your partner. Make eye contact while they speak. Nod when you follow their point. Use the small spoken signals that show you are listening: “right”, “exactly”, “I see what you mean”. None of these are marked as vocabulary, but together they change how the whole discussion sounds and feels, to your partner and to the examiner.
How to use the decision minute
When the examiner asks you to decide, resist the urge to agree immediately. One minute is enough to do it properly in three steps.
First, narrow it down: “I think it’s really between the first two, isn’t it?” Second, weigh them against each other: “Cost affects more people, but convenience might matter more day to day.” Third, decide together, and say why: “So shall we go with cost, because it affects almost everyone?”
It is fine to disagree and still reach a decision. “We don’t completely agree, but if we have to choose one, I’d go with…” That is negotiation, and it is exactly what the top band describes.
Before and after: the same discussion, rebuilt
The task: “How important are these things when people choose where to live?” The prompts are cost, transport links, job opportunities, schools and things to do.
Before
A: “I think cost is very important, because houses are very expensive now and many people can’t afford to live in the city centre.”
B: “Yes, I agree. Also transport links are important, because people need to get to work, so they want to live near a train station or a bus stop.”
A: “Yes. And job opportunities are important too, because if there are no jobs, people will move to another place.”
B: “I agree. Schools are also important for families with children.”
Every sentence is fine. But each candidate is working through the prompts on their own, and “I agree” is doing the job of a full stop. Nobody responds to an idea, so the conversation never goes anywhere.
After
A: “For most people I’d say cost comes first. Prices have gone up so much that it rules out whole areas.”
B: “That’s true, although I wonder if it depends on your stage of life. If you’ve got children, schools might matter even more than cost. Would you agree?”
A: “Maybe, but often the good schools are exactly where the expensive houses are, so the two are connected, aren’t they?”
B: “Good point. That actually makes transport more important too, because if you can’t afford to live near the good areas, you need to be able to get there.”
The language level hardly changes. What changes is that each turn picks up the previous one (“That’s true, although…”, “Maybe, but…”, “That actually makes…”), adds something new, and often hands the conversation back with a question. That is what “linking contributions to those of other speakers” sounds like.
How to practise it
You can practise interaction even without a partner.
With a friend or study partner, take any Part 3 style question. The rule is that every turn must begin by referring to something the other person said. If it doesn’t, start again.
On your own, record yourself giving one opinion on a topic. Play it back, then respond to your own recording as if it were a partner: agree with part of it, challenge part of it, and ask a question.
For the decision minute, practise narrowing to two options and comparing them out loud before choosing, until it becomes automatic.
In my sessions, I take the role of your partner as well as the examiner, so you practise responding to a real person who says unexpected things, not just delivering your own points.
The bigger picture
Two monologues and a quick yes is one of six patterns I see again and again in CAE candidates. Like the others, it comes from practising language rather than performance.
If you’d like to find out which patterns are affecting your speaking, the Initial Assessment is a 60-minute diagnostic session followed by a written Speaking Performance Profile. You can also read how to handle the long turn in CAE Speaking Part 2, or more about how I coach CAE candidates.
Frequently asked questions
How long is CAE Speaking Part 3?
About three minutes for a pair: around two minutes of discussion using the written prompts, then about one minute to reach a decision.
Do we have to talk about every prompt?
No. Discussing a few prompts in depth, and connecting them, is usually more effective than rushing through all of them.
Is it bad to disagree with my partner?
No. Polite disagreement is a natural part of discussion and shows that you are listening and responding. You can disagree and still reach a decision together.
What if my partner talks too much or too little?
Use the hand-back move: ask them a question to bring them in, or politely pick up their point and add your own. Managing the conversation well is part of interaction.