Späť na ISE III English (UK) – Collaborative task

Protecting Free Speech at College

Angličtina hovoriaci scenár

Elliot

A thoughtful British English speaker with a measured, clear tone.

35 years · male

Practise talking about "Protecting Free Speech at College" with Elliot, your AI speaking avatar. Speak out loud, get instant feedback, and build confidence for your ISE III English – Collaborative task speaking exam.

Start free AI practice

Konverzácia

We need to work together on this situation: a college is reviewing rules for controversial speakers and student events. What would you like to ask me first?

Dobrá odpoveď:

Before choosing a solution, I would pin down the real problem. In this situation, a college is reviewing rules for controversial speakers and student events. I would ask who is most affected among the people most affected, what has already been tried, and what constraint cannot be ignored. Without that, we might choose a neat solution that does not address the rights of the individual in practice.

One possible response is broad permission with clear conduct rules. What advantages and problems do you see with that idea?

Dobrá odpoveď:

That option has a clear attraction, because people can understand it quickly. Broad permission with clear conduct rules could work if the main need is structure and quick implementation. My concern is protecting one right while weakening another without enough scrutiny. Before supporting it, I would ask who might avoid it, who pays for it and how we would know whether it improves the situation rather than just making action visible.

Another option is stricter approval when topics may cause harm. How would you compare the two options?

Dobrá odpoveď:

I would compare them by asking which risk is more acceptable. Broad permission with clear conduct rules seems stronger where the problem needs clear rules, while stricter approval when topics may cause harm may be stronger where people need confidence, privacy or ownership. I would choose the option that is more likely to produce a fairer result in this situation.

Some people involved may disagree with your preferred option. How would you persuade them or adapt the plan?

Dobrá odpoveď:

If people disagreed, I would ask which part of the plan they could not accept. If their concern was reasonable, I would change the plan rather than treat compromise as weakness. For example, we could pilot the option, publish the review criteria and agree in advance what evidence would make us change direction. For protecting free speech at college, that extra link would make the point more precise.

What final recommendation would you make, and what should happen next?

Dobrá odpoveď:

My final recommendation would be conditional. I would probably choose stricter approval when topics may cause harm if it deals better with protecting one right while weakening another without enough scrutiny, but I would keep one practical strength from broad permission with clear conduct rules. Next, I would assign responsibility, consult the least heard group and set a short review against a fairer result in this situation.