Scoring Briefing · 讨好考官有用吗
There is no criterion called “the examiner liked you.” 评分标准里，没有一项叫「考官喜欢你」
Four criteria, 25% each, and all four are about language. Every Speaking test is recorded. Every six months a senior examiner reviews the marking. When your Speaking and Writing diverge from your Listening and Reading, the system re-marks you automatically. The official Chinese page denies “压分” by name. Download as PDF →
What is actually scored 到底在评什么
Four criteria. Equal weight. All language.四项标准，权重相同，考的全是语言。
This is published on the official Chinese site with the percentage stated outright.这一点官方中文网站直接写明了比重。
25%
Fluency and coherence流利度与连贯性
25%
Lexical resource词汇丰富度
25%
Grammatical range and accuracy语法多样性及准确性
25%
Pronunciation发音
0%
Being liked考官喜不喜欢你
The fifth box is mine, not IELTS's. There are four criteria and no fifth — that is the point of showing it.
Official, Chinese · 官方中文原文
“这4个标准在得分中各占25%的比重”
In English: These four criteria each carry 25% weighting in the score.
chinaielts.org — 口语评分标准 → ielts.org states the same in English: “Each of the criteria carry equal weighting and the overall average gives the IELTS score for Speaking.”
| You are not scored on your opinions 你的观点不计分 |
The IELTS Guide for Teachers puts it plainly: “Remember it is your language level that is being evaluated and not your opinions.” IDP says the same to candidates: “There are no right or wrong answers in the Speaking test” and “you are not being assessed on your opinions, rather on your use of English.” 官方《教师指南》写道：接受评估的是你的语言水平，不是你的观点。IDP 对考生的表述相同：口语没有标准答案，评的是你的英语使用，不是你的看法。 |
| Which means disagreeing costs nothing 所以观点不同不会扣分 |
An official article puts it directly: “This isn't an attack on your opinions and beliefs” and “Just because you have different views from your examiner doesn't mean the conversation is any less engaging.” Agreeing with an examiner to please them buys nothing, and usually costs you the more interesting sentence you would otherwise have said. 官方文章的原话是：这不是在攻击你的观点与信念；与考官看法不同，也不会让这场对话逊色。为了讨好而附和，换不到分数，通常还会让你少说出一句本来更好的话。 |
| What that leaves you to work on 那该练什么 |
Exactly four things, each worth the same. If you are preparing by rehearsing charming stories, you are working on a fifth thing that does not exist. The frameworks are here → 正好四件事，每件分量相同。如果你在准备「讨人喜欢的故事」，你练的是第五件事 —— 而它不存在。 |
The clock, not the mood 是时钟，不是心情
When the examiner stops you, that is the timer.考官打断你，那是计时器，不是不耐烦。
Every part of the Speaking test has a published, fixed length. Most of what candidates read as coldness is simply the frame.口语每一部分的时长都是官方公布、固定的。考生感受到的「冷淡」，多半只是流程本身。
Part 14–5 min
Part 23–4 min
Part 34–5 min
Total11–14 min
| Part 2 is timed to the second 第二部分卡着秒表 |
“You have one minute to prepare your talk”, then “the examiner will then ask you to begin talking and will stop you when the time is up.” Being stopped mid-sentence in Part 2 is the design working, not a verdict on your answer. 官方原文：你有 1 分钟准备时间；随后考官会请你开始，并在时间到时叫停。第二部分被打断，是流程如此，不是对你回答的评价。 |
| Interruptions elsewhere are normal too 其他部分被打断也正常 |
From an official article: “It's also perfectly normal for examiners to interrupt test takers mid-sentence to ask additional questions.” Candidates routinely walk out convinced an interruption meant they were failing. It meant the examiner had what they needed for that question. 官方原文：考官在考生说到一半时打断、追问，是完全正常的。很多考生走出考场，认定「被打断＝考砸了」。其实只是考官已经拿到了这一题需要的东西。 |
| The same clock on a video call 视频口试也是同一套时长 |
The official Chinese page states it explicitly: 视频通话口试所有部分的考试时长与现场对话口试完全一致 — the timings of every part of the video-call Speaking test are exactly identical to the face-to-face test. 官方明确写道：视频通话口试所有部分的考试时长与现场对话口试完全一致。 |
Sources.
ielts.org — Speaking format ·
chinaielts.org — 考试当日流程 ·
ielts.org — Don't overdo it.Every source above is public and linked. Not secret knowledge — unread knowledge.以上出处全部公开、均已附链接。这不是内部消息，是没人去读的公开材料。
What happens after you leave 你走出考场之后
Five things sit between an examiner's judgement and your result.考官的判断和你的成绩之间，隔着五道程序。
All five are published on the official Chinese site, on one page. Quoted, not summarised.这五条都写在官方中文网站的同一页上。以下为引用，不是概括。
1
Every Speaking test is recorded「其中每场口语考试都将录音以便后期监测。」
Not a sample. Every one — recorded specifically so it can be monitored afterwards.
2
A senior examiner reviews the marking every six months「每六个月高级别考官会对考官们的写作和口语评分情况进行回顾监测…」
And the review covers more than the numbers: the official sentence says it includes 是否遵循统一的规则和程序 — whether the examiner followed the uniform rules and procedures in the Speaking test.
3
Divergent scores trigger an automatic second marking「…系统将自动启动复查程序，会安排另一名雅思考官重新评判该考生的写作和口语部分。」
When the gap between your subjective sections (Speaking and Writing) and your objective sections (Listening and Reading) reaches a certain range, the system starts a review by itself and a different examiner re-marks you. Nobody has to complain first.
4
Cambridge spot-checks without warning「剑桥大学会进行不定期的成绩抽查，不设定固定的抽查频次和学生群体。」
No fixed frequency and no fixed group — which is what makes a spot-check a spot-check.
5
Every examiner is re-trained and re-certified every two years「雅思每两年要重新对所有考官进行资格再培训和再认证。」
An examiner who has drifted does not simply carry on. The cycle exists to catch drift, and it applies to all of them.
Source. All five sentences above are quoted from one page: chinaielts.org — 公平公正 → If you only ever read one official Chinese page about marking, read that one.
The word itself 「压分」这两个字
The official site uses the word and denies it.官方直接用了这个词，并作了否认。
Official, Chinese · 官方中文原文
“口语考官全球随机分配：口语考试时视频连线的考官来自包括中国在内的全球各地，且考官无法了解考生的所在地，不存在口语考官根据考生所在地而产生‘压分’现象或评分偏见。”
In English: Speaking examiners are randomly assigned globally. The examiner on the video link may be from anywhere in the world, including China, and has no way of knowing the test taker's location. There is therefore no phenomenon of Speaking examiners “suppressing scores” based on the test taker's location, and no marking bias.
Read that quote precisely — it is narrower than it first looks.
It denies bias based on location, and it describes the video-call format, where the examiner is connected remotely. It does not say the examiner cannot see your nationality, your school or your registration details, and I am not going to claim it does. What it does establish is that the examiner facing you on a video link very often is not in your city, has no way of knowing where you are, and has nothing to gain from marking you down.
这句话否认的是基于「所在地」的偏见，描述的是视频口试。它没有说考官看不到你的国籍、学校或报名信息，我也不会替它这样说。它确立的是：视频连线的考官往往不在你的城市，无从得知你在哪里，也没有任何理由压你的分。
Where I stop 我说到哪为止
The examiner is a person, and I am not going to pretend otherwise.考官是人，这一点我不会假装不是。
The honest claim is narrower than “bias is impossible” — and it is still enough to change how you prepare.诚实的说法比「不可能有偏见」要窄 —— 但已经足以改变你的备考方式。
No official source says likeability is excluded.
What is published is that language is what is scored, and that opinions are not. I could not find any official statement that an examiner's personal impression of you plays no part. That sentence does not exist, so I am not quoting it.
The “fixed script” claim rests on an old document.
IELTS-published research from 2006 describes an Interlocutor Frame — “essentially a script” — and quotes 2001 examiner instructions requiring exact wording in Part 1. I have not found a current public page saying the same in plain terms, so treat “the examiner reads from a frame” as well-evidenced historically and consistent with today's published timings, rather than as a current quotable rule.
Nothing published says what happens to an inconsistent examiner.
The official material describes correcting the score — re-marking, spot-checks, re-certification. It does not describe consequences for the examiner. I looked, and I am reporting the absence rather than filling it.
So here is the honest version. An examiner's judgement is human. What the published system does is give that judgement very little room: four criteria and no fifth, a clock that runs the conversation, a recording of every test, a six-monthly review of whether procedure was followed, an automatic re-mark when your scores disagree with each other, and re-certification every two years. You cannot charm your way through that, and you do not need to. 诚实的版本是：考官的判断是人的判断，但公开的机制给这份判断留下的空间很小 —— 四项标准、固定时钟、全程录音、半年一次的程序回顾、分差异常自动重判、每两年重新认证。你讨好不了这套系统，也不需要。
What to do instead 那该怎么做
Stop performing. Start answering.别表演，回答问题就好。
| Do not memorise answers 不要背答案 |
Official wording: “Examiners are highly trained to spot memorised answers, which never bodes well for test takers”, and “Scripted responses don't give examiners an accurate gauge of your ability to communicate in English.” This is published guidance rather than a stated marking penalty — but the people who wrote it train the examiners. 官方原文：考官受过严格训练，能识别背诵的答案，而这对考生从来不是好事；背下来的回答，无法让考官准确判断你用英语交流的能力。这是官方给的建议，不是明文写出的扣分条款 —— 但写这段话的人，正是培训考官的人。 |
| Do not read an interruption as a verdict 别把被打断当成判决 |
It is normal, it is published as normal, and in Part 2 it is the timer. Candidates who spend the remaining minutes rattled after an interruption lose fluency marks to a misreading. 被打断是正常的，官方也写明是正常的；在第二部分那更是计时器。因为被打断而慌掉、影响后面几分钟的流利度，才是真正的损失。 |
| Say what you actually think 说你真正的想法 |
Not because honesty is scored — it is not — but because you speak more fluently about a view you hold than one you are constructing to please someone. Fluency and coherence is 25% of the mark. Performing agreement costs you there. 不是因为诚实会加分 —— 它不加分 —— 而是因为讲自己真正的看法，比临时编一个讨好的看法说得更顺。流利度与连贯性占 25%，表演式的附和，恰恰扣在这一项上。 |
| Prepare the four things that exist 练那四件真实存在的事 |
Fluency and coherence, lexical resource, grammatical range and accuracy, pronunciation. Each 25%. A structure for each part beats a stock of charming anecdotes. Part 1 · A-R-E → Part 2 · P.P.F.E. → Part 3 · F-E-E-L → 流利度与连贯性、词汇丰富度、语法多样性及准确性、发音，各占 25%。为每一部分准备一个结构，比准备一堆讨喜的小故事有用得多。 |
No band score is promised anywhere in this material. What is offered is the published criteria, the published clock and the published audit chain — so you can put your preparation where the marks actually are.
How this was compiled 编制方法说明
What is quoted, what is absent, what is opinion.哪些是引用，哪些是缺失，哪些是观点。
Method note · 说明
| Quoted | The 25% weighting, the five audit sentences, the 压分 sentence and the video-call timing sentence are quoted from chinaielts.org. The criteria names, the part timings, the opinions line and the memorisation lines are quoted from ielts.org, the IELTS Guide for Teachers and IDP. Every quote was checked against the source page directly. |
| Three absences, stated as absences | No official source says likeability or personality is excluded from marking; no current public page states the examiner reads from a fixed script; and nothing published describes what happens to an examiner found to be inconsistent. All three are marked where they arise rather than papered over. |
| Read narrowly, on purpose | The 压分 denial concerns bias by location and describes the video-call format. This briefing does not stretch it into a general claim of examiner anonymity. |
| Two figures that differ by source | The IELTS Guide for Teachers says examiners are monitored at least once every two years, and three times in their first year. chinaielts.org says senior examiners review marking every six months. These describe different mechanisms, so each is attributed to its own source rather than merged. |
| Opinion | That performing agreement costs you fluency, and that candidates misread interruptions as verdicts, are my views from teaching in Beijing. Neither is a measured finding. |
| Not a claim about any examiner | Nothing here is a claim about any individual examiner, centre or school. |
| Band descriptors | Descriptor wording is paraphrased throughout this site and never reproduced. |
| Credentials | Certified by IDP Education in Understanding the Assessment Criteria for both Speaking and Writing. IDP is one of the three organisations that jointly own IELTS. This is a teacher-training certificate — IELTS has not endorsed this briefing, the books, or the classes. Certificate numbers → |
Sources.
chinaielts.org — 公平公正 ·
chinaielts.org — 口语评分标准 ·
chinaielts.org — 考试当日流程 ·
ielts.org — Speaking format ·
ielts.org — Scoring in detail ·
ielts.org — Don't overdo it ·
IELTS Guide for Teachers (PDF) ·
IDP — Examiner-approved Speaking tips.
Official pages change. If a source has changed since publication, the source wins — please tell me.
Take it further 继续深入
Put the preparation where the marks are.把备考放在真正给分的地方。
Everything below is free and needs no sign-up.以下全部免费，无需注册。
| This briefing as a PDF 本简报 PDF 版 | Printable A4 with the four criteria, the clock and all five audit quotes in Chinese and English. |
| Part 1 · the A-R-E trainer 第一部分训练器 | A structure for the short answers, so fluency does not depend on how the question lands. |
| Part 2 · the P.P.F.E. trainer 第二部分训练器 | What to do with the one minute of preparation, and how to still be talking when the examiner stops you. |
| Part 3 · the F-E-E-L trainer 第三部分训练器 | The abstract discussion, where opinions are asked for and none of them are scored. |
| Does the city change your score? 换个城市考 | The companion briefing — the same audit chain, aimed at the claim that some cities mark more generously. |
| Who can actually give you a band score? 谁能给你打分 | What IDP publishes about teachers awarding band scores, and what “indicative” means. |
The examiner is not your obstacle and not your ally. They are following a clock and four criteria, and a recording of the whole thing exists. Browse the series →