돌아가기 ISE IV English (UK) – Interactive task

University Admissions After AI Tutoring

영어 말하기 시나리오

Sonia

A composed British English speaker with a professional, reassuring style.

41 years · female

Practise talking about "University Admissions After AI Tutoring" with Sonia, your AI speaking avatar. Speak out loud, get instant feedback, and build confidence for your ISE IV English – Interactive task speaking exam.

Start free AI practice

대화

I am going to give you a situation. Elite applicants increasingly use expensive AI tutors to prepare applications. You need to ask questions and then tell me what you think should happen. What do you need to know first?

좋은 답변:

I would need to know where the power sits before giving a view. In this case, elite applicants increasingly use expensive AI tutors to prepare applications. I would ask who benefits immediately, who bears the risk if the judgement is wrong, and whether affected people can appeal or demand reasons. Without those answers, the proposal may sound efficient while concealing the risk of reform helping confident families while leaving quieter disadvantage untouched.

The main options are permit AI support with disclosure or redesign admissions tasks to reduce coaching advantage. What assumption behind these options would you challenge?

좋은 답변:

I would be wary of the idea that permit AI support with disclosure and redesign admissions tasks to reduce coaching advantage are the only realistic moral choices. They may be useful starting points, but the real decision may require a narrower pilot, a stronger appeal route or a different definition of success. Otherwise we may choose between two polished versions of the same blind spot.

Suppose someone says your approach is too cautious and that urgent action is needed. How would you respond?

좋은 답변:

My response would be that urgent action still needs limits. I would allow action where the current harm is clear, but I would limit scale, publish reasons and set a review date. That responds to pressure without pretending the risk has disappeared, especially when the policy could lead to the risk of reform helping confident families while leaving quieter disadvantage untouched.

What long-term consequence worries you most if this decision is handled badly?

좋은 답변:

The long-term risk that worries me most is institutional habit. Once organisations build procedures around a decision, reversing it becomes expensive, embarrassing and politically difficult. In university admissions after ai tutoring, the risk of reform helping confident families while leaving quieter disadvantage untouched could start to feel normal rather than exceptional, which is more damaging than a single poor decision.

Where should responsibility sit: individuals, institutions, markets or government?

좋은 답변:

The public may have a stake, but institutions need explicit duties. Government should set enforceable limits, institutions should explain and monitor decisions, and private actors should not profit from risks they do not carry. Individuals need voice, but voice is not a substitute for power or an appeal mechanism.

After hearing the objections, what final position would you take?

좋은 답변:

I would take a staged position. I would not give a pure yes or no answer. I would allow the least irreversible action that addresses the immediate harm, but only with published reasons, independent review and a real route for people to challenge outcomes that affect them.