The 1st part of IELTS Speaking : An Interview


 – What is your full name?

– Can I see your ID?

– Where are you from?

– Do you work or study?

– Do you live in an apartment or a house?

– What can you see through your window?

– Do you like chocolate?

– Did you like it as a child?

– Why is chocolate so popular?

– Have you ever been given chocolate as a gift?

– Did you use to read books as a teenager?

– Do you buy or borrow books?

– Why is that?

– Do you read books online?


The 2nd part of that : Cue Card


Talk about a tall building you know. Please say


– What and where is it?

– What does it look like?

– Do you like or dislike it? Why?


The 3rd part of the test : Discussion


– Does climate affect house construction?

– Why do some people choose to build houses themselves?

– Do you think architects have challenges in creating houses today?

– Why do you think it is so?

– Do we need to construct houses near historical sites?

– Will aesthetic value of these historical places be reduced if construction is allowed?

– Why do you think so?


Why should I take part in online IELTS and TOEFL courses offered by Dr.Arian Karimi



dr.arian karimi online ielts toefl course

The term of online was not very appealing in 1970s and 1080s just like an airplane in the beginning of the 20th century. Internet was in development stage in early 1990s compared to now and the conventional wisdom about the online courses was different in 1990s than today. We are in the 21st century where everything is possible and acceptable. For example, students are studying at home/work place utilizing computer which is called online schooling/learning.


There are several factors contributing the growth of online enrollment including the following:


Younger people are choosing non-traditional education to start and advancing in their careers while completing and furthering their education.

Severe recession of 2008 has created poor economic situations where people are upgrading/changing their career through online educational/training programs.


Online method of education can be a highly effective alternative method of education for the students who are matured, self-disciplined and motivated, well organized and having high degree of time management skills, but it is an inappropriate learning environment for more dependent learners and has difficulty assuming responsibilities required by the online courses.


The Boston-based consulting firm Eduventures, Inc.(2006) found that about half of institutions and more than 60 percent of employers generally accept the high quality of online learning, but students’ perceptions differ. Only about 33 percent of prospective online students said that they perceive the quality of online education to be “as good as or better than” face-to-face education. At the same time, 36 percent of prospective students surveyed cited concern about employers’ acceptance of online education as a reason for their reluctance to enroll in online courses.

Varieties of online educational methods have been developed, but the potential students should consider some identifiable factors common to all types before enrolling in any course/program,in partcular,in an IELTS or TOEFL course. Generally all these factors are not applicable to every online learning situation, but they do apply to most. You as an IELTS / TOEFL test taker should more closely examine the online programs that most interest you and be sure that the program fits your life, career needs and job.


As an IELTS instructor, the approach to this new paradigm might be with varying degree of enthusiasm and/or concern. I ususally ask myself a few questions:

Are you optimistic or skeptical about Online learning?
Are you interested in knowing how delivering courses online can improve your teaching and offer excellent learning opportunities for your students?
Do you want to know what you will be up against as you plan and deliver your classes online?

It is critical to consider both the pros and cons of online learning so you can be better prepared to face the challenge of working in this new environment and embrace the new opportunities that it has to offer, and that is its Strengths and Weaknesses.


The following is a good listing of the advantages of online IELTS and TOEFL courses:


Online Education Pros: Can be divided into four groups.

Less Expensive
Additional Benefits


Convenience: This convenience is in relation to study location, time, course duration, etc.


No commuting/traveling time to a campus

No geographic location constraint in selecting the learning option(s)

No learning pace constraint, you can learn at your pace and study at your convenience

No verbally expressing constraint, you can express yourself in writing rather than verbally

You can have virtual discussion rather instructor-led lecture

Course work and instructions can highly be customized to your field and subject area

High quality dialog: Learner is able to carefully reflect his/her quality thinking on each comment from others before responding or moving on to the next topic.

Student centered: Students are expected to read all of their classmates’ contributions, but they may actively engaged only in those parts of the contribution most relevant to their needs.

Access to resources: It is easy to include guest experts or students from other institutions as well as access to resources and information around the world.


Less Expensive: Generally these courses cost less than regular classroom academic or trade school course.

No travel and housing costs to classroom
Class attendee can continue to work at his/her job while taking classes


Technology: You can work on the course just about anywhere you have computer access. Online courses provide an opportunity to learn new technologies and practicing the use of office software, Internet, etc.


Additional Benefits: There are numerous additional benefits that you can mention them leaving a comment.


You will work with classmates not only from all over the Iran, but could be around the world.

No discrimination among students due to race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, age, dress, physical appearance, etc.

Equal participation from all classmates and the most outgoing student will not monopolize the discussion.
These courses are better for those people who are introverted as well as who learn through visual cues and require more time in understanding the material.
No immigration problems

Synergy: High level of dynamic interaction between the instructor and students as well as among the students themselves. Ideas and resources are shared, and continuous synergy will be generated through the learning process as each individual contributes to the course discussions and comments on classmates’ work.

Creative teaching: In the adult education class with the interactive learning environment may contribute to self-direction and critical thinking. Especially the nature of the semi-autonomous and self-directed world of the virtual classroom makes innovative and creative approaches to instruction even more important.


In a nutshell:


Obviously, there are advantages and disadvantages to every type of learning environment.


Students have to analyze both the pros and cons factors which contribute greatly to making an informed decision about the direction of his/her career path. Students have to decide, how they are going to accomplish their goals: online, in the classroom or a combination of both.

However, in some situations the inconvenience of maintaining a consistent school schedule prohibits potential students from furthering their education. It is also true that learning is highly dependent on the individual’s motivation to learn. So the bottom line is that the efforts any student puts into their education that eventually determines how much he/she will retain and how beneficial the overall experience was to his/her future career.

The influence of rater characteristics and other rater background factors


( Based on a research conducted by Teachers College, Columbia University )


In complement to the studies which looked at how raters differ, studies on the effects of rater background factors attempt to explain why raters differ, with an increasing attention to the effects  of rater language background, rater expertise and rater training on raters’ cognitive processes and rating behaviors. Findings from both types of studies can be combined to provide a useful frame of reference for conceptualizing rater cognition in future research.


Rater language background (i.e., native/non-native speaking rater comparisons, matches between rater and examinee language background) has received major attention among researchers in L2 speaking assessment. A representative study that examined the cognitive differences between native and non-native speaking groups of raters was conducted by Zhang &Elder (2011, 2014), who investigated ESL/EFL teachers’ evaluation and interpretation of oral English proficiency in the national College English Test-Spoken English Test (CET-SET) of China. They found that NS raters attended to a wider range of abilities when judging candidates’ oral test performance than NNS raters. NS raters also tended to emphasize features of interaction while NNS raters were more likely to focus on linguistic resources such as accuracy. Similarly, Gui (2012) investigated whether American and Chinese EFL teachers differed in their evaluations of student oral performance in an undergraduate speech competition in China. He found that the American raters provided more specific and elaborated qualitative comments than the Chinese raters. The raters also differed in their judgment of students’ pronunciation, language usage, and speech delivery. One unique difference was related to raters’ comments on students’ nonverbal communication skills. The Chinese raters provided mostly positive comments about the gestures and other non-verbal demeanors of the students as a group, while the American raters were mostly critical. Both Zhang & Elder’s (2011, 2014) and Gui’s (2012) studies have offered some interesting revelations as to the differences in the perception of oral English proficiency and the pedagogical priorities between these two groups of raters. However, they seem to mainly focus on the aspects and features of language performance raters heed, leaving other important aspects of rater cognition, such as raters’ decision-making behaviors and rating approaches, not thoroughly attended to. Another set of limitations also exist with regard to the validity and the generalizability of these results. The first limitation lies in the homogeneity of the student samples selected in both studies. Chinese students who share the same L1 and similar educational background might undermine the generalizability of the results to other test-taker populations. There is also limitation with regard to the validity of using written comments as the major data for analysis, which might not offer a full account of raters’ in-depth rating behaviors.


The last impediment to the validity of the results from both studies, as had been discussed in precedent studies on the influence of rater language background (Brown, 1995; Kim, 2009), pertains to the possibility that variables other than rater language background, such as raters’ scoring experiences or their places of residence, could have caused the variance in ratings instead. Rater language background thus ended up in the original results as a proxy variable. This limitation has raised the question of whether language background is “a particularly meaningful category as far as predicting raters’ behavior is concerned” (Zhang & Elder, 2014, p. 320).

Another type of research on rater language background attempted to find out whether raters tend to bias in favor of test-takers whose language backgrounds are related to theirs. Researchers have looked at the influence of both rater L1 and rater L2 and seem to diverge in their opinions. Winke, Gass, & Myford (2011, 2012) investigated whether raters were influenced by the link between their L2 and test-takers’ L1 through scoring the TOEFL iBT speaking test.

Both statistical results and qualitative data analyses suggested that raters tended to assign scores that were significantly higher than expected to test takers whose L1 matches their L2 (i.e., heritage status), due to familiarity and positive personal reactions to test-takers’ accents and L1. On the contrary, Wei & Llosa (2015) examined the differences between American and Indian raters in their scores and scoring processes while rating Indian test takers’ responses to the TOEFL iBT speaking tasks. They found no statistically significant differences between Indian and American raters in their use of the scoring criteria, their attitudes toward Indian English, or in the internal consistency and severity of the scores. In-depth qualitative analysis revealed that some Indian raters even held negative attitudes toward Indian English, due to factors more complicated than their own language background. For example, the negative judgments one rater received about his native language caused him to believe that adopting standard American English is important for surviving in the United States. As a result, this rater might not have endorsed test-takers’ shared language background. The findings of this study suggest that sharing a common language background does not guarantee a positive evaluation of test-takers’ L2 speaking performance after all. However, issues regarding the small and homogeneous sample of Indian raters used might undermine the generalizability of the findings of this study, which should be further examined by including raters and test-takers of other language varieties.


So far in L2 speaking assessment, researchers have provided statistical and qualitative support for various hypotheses regarding whether raters are potentially biased toward test-takers from a similar language background. However, they have yet to examine whether deeper, underlying cognitive differences exist in raters’ scoring processes, such as their approaches to rating and their focus and feature attention, while they are evaluating the performance of testtakers with mixed language backgrounds. One of the studies that attempted to tap into those cognitive differences was conducted by Xi & Mollaun (2009, 2011), who investigated the extent to which a special training package can help raters from India to score examinees with mixed first language (L1) backgrounds more accurately and consistently. As they found out, the special training not only improved Indian raters’ consistency in scoring both Indian and non-Indian examinees, but also boosted their confidence in scoring. Those findings led to further discussion of whether raters adopted different styles of rating depending on the match between their and the examinees’ first languages. For example, after the special training, the raters from India may have employed more analytical approaches to scoring Indian examinees while engaging in more impressionistic, intuitive evaluations for examinees whose L1s were not familiar to them (Xi & Mollaun, 2009), thus balancing out their tendency to bias toward test-takers of their own language background. However, the researchers could only make hypotheses about the change in raters’ cognitive styles due to lack of direct empirical evidence (e.g., raters’ verbal protocol data), which could have served to corroborate their quantitative findings.


Apart from rater language background, rater experience and rater training are also important factors that are found to affect raters’ rating styles and behaviors in L2 speaking assessment. Among the series of studies that have explicitly examined the effects of experience on raters’ cognitive processes and rating behaviors in language testing, the vast majority were conducted in writing assessment (Barkaoui, 2010; Cumming, 1990; Delaruelle, 1997; Lim, 2011; Myford, Marr, and Linacre, 1996; Sakyi, 2003; Wolfe, 1997, 2006; Wolfe, Kao, & Ranney, 1998). Research findings in writing assessment generally seem to agree that prior teaching or testing experience influences raters' decision making processes (Davis, 2012). Experienced raters are found to score faster (Sakyi, 2003), consider a wider variety of language features (Cumming, 1990; Kim, 2011; Sakyi, 2003), and are more inclined to withhold premature judgments in order to glean more information (Barkaoui, 2010; Wolfe, 1997). In terms of rater training, the majority of the studies in both writing and speaking assessment seems to suggest that training does not completely eliminate the variability existing in either rater severity (Brown, 1995; Lumley & McNamara, 1995; Myford & Wolfe, 2000) or their scoring standards and decision making processes (Meiron, 1998; Orr, 2002; Papajohn, 2002; Winke, Gass & Myford, 2011).


In contrast to the relatively larger number of studies on rater experience and rater training in L2 writing assessment, researchers in L2 speaking assessment have only recently begun to examine the impacts of those two rater background factors on raters’ scoring processes and behaviors (Davis, 2012, 2015; Isaacs & Thompson, 2013; Kim, 2011, 2015). Kim (2015) compared rater behaviors across three rater groups (novice, developing, and expert) in the evaluation of ESL learners’ oral responses, and examined the development of rating performance within each group over time. The analysis revealed that the three groups of raters demonstrated distinct levels of rating ability and different paces of progress in their rating performance. Based on her findings, she concluded that rater characteristics should be examined extensively to improve the current understanding of raters’ different needs for training and rating. She also discussed her own conceptualization of rater characteristics and relative expertise drawing on relevant literature in writing assessment (e.g., Cumming, 1990; Delaruelle, 1997; Erdosy, 2004; Lumley, 2005; Sakyi, 2003; Weigle, 1998; Wolfe, 2006), and proposed perhaps the most up-todate framework of rating L2 speaking performance germane to those rater characteristics.


According to Kim (2011, 2015), rater expertise is composed of four concrete rater background variables (i.e., experience in rating, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages [TESOL] experience, rater training, and coursework). The interactions of those rater background variables influence the rating-related knowledge and strategic competence that raters utilize during scoring, also known as their rating ability. Rating performance is then accomplished by raters harnessing their rating ability in an actual rating occasion. Kim’s model is perhaps the most complicated framework of rating performance germane to rater background variables to date.


In another representative study on rater expertise in L2 speaking assessment, Davis (2012, 2015) investigated how raters of different rating proficiency scored responses from the TOEFL iBT speaking test differently prior to and following training. Considerable individual variations were seen in the frequency with which the exemplars were used and reviewed by raters, the language features mentioned during rating, and the styles of commenting by each rater (e.g., the array of topics covered and the amount of detailed explanation on specific points). The effects of training were reflected in the ways that raters gave more explicit attention to their scoring processes, and that they made fewer disorganized, or unclear comments over time. Both Kim’s (2011, 2015) and Davis’ (2012, 2015) research is comprehensive in terms of the rater background factors (i.e., rater experience interacting with training) they focused on and the research design and methods (i.e., mixed-method research design) they used to tap into the influence of those background factors. However, the data reported in their research primarily address raters’ accuracy of interpreting the rating scales and performance level descriptors (Kim, 2015), and raters’ conscious attention to specific language features while scoring (Davis, 2012), leaving other important aspects of rater cognition, such as the mental actions raters take to reach a scoring decision, not thoroughly attended to.


As a further attempt to investigate the cognitive differences between more and less experienced raters, Isaacs & Thompson (2013) examined the effects of rater experience on their judgments of L2 speech, especially regarding pronunciation. This study has discovered some fresh cognitive differences between experienced and novice raters, in terms of the (meta)cognitive strategies they use to harness their relative experience with ESL learners, their emotional reactions and attitudes toward their levels of experience, their rating focus and feature attention, their professional knowledge and TESOL vocabulary to describe L2 speech, and the relative lengths and styles of their verbal comments. Evidence from verbal protocols and posttask interviews suggested that experienced and novice raters adopted strategies to either draw on or balance out their perceived experience with L2 speech during scoring. For example, some experienced raters reported that they might have been affected by their experience with ESL learners in their comprehension and evaluation of learners’ speech in comparison to non-ESL teachers. To neutralize the influence, some even attempted to envision themselves as non-ESL trained interlocutors when assigning scores. Conversely, several novice raters expressed feelings of inadequacy to be judges due to their insufficient experience specifying and assessing learner speech. In terms of rating focus and feature attention, experienced raters were more likely to identify specific pronunciation errors through either detailed characterization or imitation/correction of student speech. Compared to their novice counterparts, they also had a more flexible range of professional knowledge of L2 pronunciation and assessment, whereas novice raters were more uniformly lacking in their command of TESOL vocabulary to the extent that they had to think of more creative terms to describe L2 speech. Experienced raters were also found to produce longer think-aloud and interview comments, since they almost unexceptionally provided anecdotal descriptions about their teaching or assessment practices. Even though the study attempted to gather evidence that shows raters diverged cognitively depending on their levels of rating experience, it is still unclear if the cognitive differences discovered were the essential ones that distinguish experienced raters from the novice ones. For example, it has not been verified if novice raters failed to articulate their perceptions of the speech due to their inadequate access to the vocabulary used by experienced raters, or rather due to the fact that experienced and novice raters were heeding qualitatively different dimensions of the speech overall, having different perceptions and interpretation of the construct and the scoring rubric, or following different approaches of rating. Therefore, it is important to examine in greater detail the factors that might have affected those raters’ judgment process while scoring.


The most commonly studied rater background factors in L2 speaking assessment so far are rater language background, rater experience and rater training. What has been little known, however, is whether other sources of rater variability, for example, those related to the difference in raters’ cognitive abilities, also affect raters’ evaluation of L2 speaking performance. In a pioneering study, Isaacs & Trofimovich (2011) investigated how raters’ judgments of L2 speech were associated with individual differences in their phonological memory, attention control, and musical ability. Results showed that raters who specialized in music assigned significantly lower scores than non-music majors for non-native like accents, particularly for low ability L2 speakers. However, the ratings were not significantly influenced by the variability in raters’phonological memory and attention control. Reassuring as it is that phonological memory and attention control are not found to induce bias in raters’ assessments of L2 speech, this study is an initial attempt to tap into raters’ cognitive abilities in relation to L2 speaking assessment, and calls for further explorations of the nature of the impacts of those abilities. One major caveat that might undermine the validity of the results here, as the researchers (Isaacs & Trofimovich, 2011) themselves have pointed out, is that phonological memory and attention control might not be as relevant to raters’ perceptual judgments of L2 speech as alternative measures such as acoustic memory and the scope of attention, which raters might have drawn on more heavily to process and evaluate L2 speech (pp. 132- 133). Apart from that, the cognitive tasks used to measure raters’ phonological memory (i.e., a serial non-word recognition task) and attention control (i.e., the trail-making test) might not be as effective as other tasks (e.g., nonword repetition or recall tasks) to yield the maximum association between those cognitive capacities and raters’ perceptual judgments of L2 speech (Isaacs & Trofimovich, 2011, p. 132). The trail-making task, for example, was used to measure attention control of listeners who evaluate language performance. However, since the nature of the task is language neutral (p. 122), it does not seem to have much connection with real-life language processing and therefore, might not be the optimal measure of attentional control in the context of this study. In terms of the methods for data analyses, apart from preliminary statistical analyses of the results of cognitive ability measures, the study could also have benefited from collection and analyses of qualitative data (e.g., raters’ verbal protocols and interview/questionnaire results) to capture more direct evidence of the effects of raters’ cognitive abilities on their rating process. This study is obviously groundbreaking in terms of its implications to investigate rater cognition in relation to the architecture of human information processing and the functionality of the brain for L2 speaking assessments. However, apart from phonological memory and attentional control, the effects of many other cognitive abilities and mechanisms should also have been taken into account, such as raters’ attention and perception, long-term memory (i.e., declarative, procedural and episodic memory which might influence raters’ mental representations of both the rubric and the L2 speech, and their rating styles and strategies), or reasoning and decision-making skills, to provide a more comprehensive picture of the important role that each component of the human cognitive architecture plays in the process of rating L2 speech. Musical ability, the factor that appeared to influence raters’ judgments of accentedness in this study, needs to be explored in greater detail to explain how individual differences in musical expertise may impact rater behavior more precisely. Not only can drawbacks be found regarding the types of cognitive abilities explored in this study and the tasks used to measure them, how those cognitive abilities might affect the evaluation of a construct of speaking ability more broadly defined is also left unexplored (p.136). For instance, researchers of this study only focused on three components of the speaking ability construct (i.e., accentedness, comprehensibility and fluency), without incorporating other elements (e.g. grammar and vocabulary), therefore largely diminishing the generalizability of the results to a wider variety of speaking tasks and oral proficiency constructs. The relatively homogenous sample of raters recruited (i.e., college majors who are untrained and inexperienced for scoring L2 speech) can also limit the generalizability of the results.


To summarize, by examining the interactions between various rater background factors and raters’ judgment processes, researchers reached generally similar conclusions about the possible effects of different rater background factors on raters’ cognitive processes and rating behaviors. Rater language background is found to be likely to affect the raters’ focus and perception of oral proficiency when they are identified as native/non-native speaking individuals.


Matches in language background between raters and examinees can also influence raters’ comprehension and evaluation of examinees’ interlanguage speech. Rater experience and rater training are also found to have impacts on raters’ scoring approaches and styles, their commenting styles, their decision-making behaviors and strategy use, their focus and attention to performance features, and their interpretation and utilization of the scoring criteria. One of the groundbreaking studies (Isaacs & Trofimovich, 2011) attempted to look into the effects of individual differences in raters’ cognitive abilities on their rating patterns and scoring process, but the results are not as convincing as expected due to a number of limitations. One major limitation among most of the studies is that they only focused on one or two isolated aspects (e.g. rater focus and feature attention) while exploring how rater background factors affect rating behaviors and cognitive processes, leaving other aspects not thoroughly explored, especially those that are directly related to raters’ cognitive processes (e.g., raters’ internal processing of information and their strategy use). Therefore, future research can improve our understanding of how various rater background factors might impact raters’ judgment process by systematically exploring those influences from a cognitive-processing perspective.



Human raters are usually engaged with the judgment of interlanguage speech that examinees produce in L2 speaking assessment. As a result, rater cognition has been extensively explored to inform our understanding of the exact nature of rater variability and help us tackle practical problems regarding score validation and rater training. As the above review has shown, existing studies in L2 speaking assessment which have contributed to the conceptualization of rater cognition can be categorized into two types: studies that examine how raters differ (and sometimes agree) in their cognitive processes and rating behaviors, and studies that explore why they differ. The first type looked at how raters tend to differ or agree in their cognitive processes and rating behaviors, mainly in terms of their focus and feature attention, their approaches to scoring, and their treatment of the scoring criteria and non-criteria relevant aspects and features of performance. This is also the type of studies that most directly describes raters’ mental processes during scoring. The second type attempted to explain why raters differ (and usually they do), through the analysis of the interactions between various rater background factors and raters’ scoring behaviors.

Regardless of disagreement in their findings, many researchers would probably argue that rater background variables, mainly composed of their language background, rating experience and training experience, can lead to individual variability and/or overtime adjustment in their judgment process when scoring L2 speech.


Reference : Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 1-24 Rater Cognition in L2 Speaking Assessment.

IELTS Preparation course by Dr.Arian Karimi The Best IELTS Instructor and Scholar From Iran


A comprehensive IELTS course by Iran IELTS Specialist

The General Training IELTS Test That Was Administrated in Ireland in April 2017


The Writing moduel of The IELTS Test


Writing an Infromal or Semi-Formal Letter in IELTS Task 1


Your friend is planning to come and visit you next month. Unfortunately you can’t meet him/her. Write a letter to your friend and say


– Apologise about it.

– Explain the reason why you can’t meet him/her.

– Suggest a different arrangement to meet later.


Writing an IELTS Essay in Writing Task 2 of the Test


Some people believe that for an effective studying process at school students should be involved in decisions how to run the school. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?


IELTS Speaking Interview and Cue Card Question Types


IELTS Interview Questions


– What is your full name?

– Can I see your ID?

– Where are you from?

– Do you work or study?

– Describe your hometown.

– Do you like children?

– How often do you watch television?

– Did you watch a lot of TV as a child? Why?

– Do you like buying shoes?

– What do you prefer to wear, comfortable or fashionable shoes?

– Have you ever bought shoes online?


IELTS Cue Card Sample Topic


Talk about a good time you spent with a young child. Please say

– who the child is

– when you spent time with him/her

– what you did together

– and why you had a good time.


IELTS Discussion Part Question Types


– Do you think it is a good strategy for parents to always control their children?

– Why do you think so?

– Are children living differently now than in the past?

– Nowadays children use lots of electronic gadgets, what do you think about it?

– Does it affect children’s development?

– In what way?

– Are there any positive effects of using gadgets?

آیلتس هند - نمونه سوالات آیلتس آکادمیک در آوریل سال 2017


Academic Module of IELTS test in India in April 2017



IELTS Writing Test


IELTS Writing Task 1 (a report)


We were given two charts providing data about full and part-time employment among men and women in the UK between 1980 and 2005. We had to summarise and describe the data.


IELTS Writing Task 2 (an essay)


Nowadays the number of cars on roads is increasing incrementally. In order to change this trend strict road tolls should be paid on busy roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your opinion.


Speaking test


IELTS Interview


– What is your full name?

– Can I see your ID?

– Where are you from?

– Do you work or study?

– What do you do?


– Why did you chose this profession?

– What do you usually do in your free time?

– Let’s talk about reading.

– Do you like to read? Why?

– What kind of books do you prefer?

– Can you name a few that you like?


IELTS Cue Card


Talk about a piece of equipment that you use at home. Please say


– What is it?

– How do you use it?

– How important is it to you and your family members?


IELTS Discussion


– Let’s talk about technology.

– How is technology helping you?

– Give some examples, please.

– What are the negative impacts of modern technology on us?

– To what extent did it influence you?

– To what extent did it influence your family members?

– Would you like to have a robot in your home in the future?

– Will robots replace people in the future?

IELTS Test in Singapore – April 2017 (General Training)

IELTS Listening Test

Section 1. About Grand Sands Bay hotel holiday packages.

Section 2. A home store improvement plan.

Section 3. Don’t remember.

Section 4. The impact of Australian cars between 1940s and 1990s.

IELTS Reading Test

Passage 1. About museums.

Questions: True/False/Not Given.

Passage 2. About world tour holiday options.

Questions: match headings to paragraphs.

Passage 3. About the Chartered Institute of Marketing and members’ benefits.

Passage 4. About Benchmark institution, its staff and apprenticeship program.

Passage 5. About volunteering program suitable for all ages.

IELTS Writing Test

IELTS Writing task 1 (a letter)

One of your colleagues from another country comes to your office for an official meeting. Write a letter to him/her and say

– Describe how to get from the airport to his/her hotel.

– Describe the hotel he/she will be staying in.

– Describe the arrangement for the meeting.

IELTS Writing Task 2 (an essay)

Some people believe it is better for children to grow up in the city while others say it is better to grow up in the countryside. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

IELTS Speaking test

IELTS Speaking Interview

– What is your full name?

– Can I see your ID?

– Where are you from?

– Do you work or study?

IELTS Speaking Cue Card

Talk about an instance when you were prevented from using a mobile phone. Please say

– Where and when did it take place?

– Why did you need to use your phone?

– How did you feel then?

IELTS Speaking Discussion Part

– Why was the phone usage prohibited there?

– Don’t remember the other questions.

خانه آيلتس سعادت آباد


 Dr. Arian Karimi ielts semi private class


دوره نيمه خصوصي آیلتس در سعادت آباد با دكتر آرين كريمي




دوره حضوری و نيمه خصوصي تكنيكهاي آيلتس دكتر آرين كريمي


 نيمه خصوصي ( 2 نفره ) با نصف هزينه


طول دوره 50 ساعت ( 25 جلسه 2 ساعته )



سطح پايه زبان مورد نياز براي شركت در اين دوره آيلتس : Intermediate



هدف از شركت در اين دوره فشرده آيلتس نيمه خصوصي كسب نمره 7 در آزمون آيلتس جنرال


ظرفيت باقي مانده براي ثبت نام در اين دوره آيلتس 1 نفر ( يك نفر قبلا ثبت نام شده است )


زمان شروع اين دوره آيلتس : به محظ ثبت نام نفر دوم كلاس شروع خواهد شد




ظرفیت این دوره تکمیل شده و کلاس آغاز شده است. جهت شرکت در دوره های مشابه بعدی با ما تماس بگیرید


اولین سوالی که بعد از شنیدن نیاز به مدرک آیلتس ( IELTS ) به عنوان اولین شرط مهاجرت یا تحصیل در کشورهایی نظیر کانادا استرالیا آمریکا نیوزلند اروپا سوئد آلمان و نظیر اینها یا خواندن چندین سایت مهاجرتی یا اخذ پذیرش تحصیلی و بورسیه به ذهن کسانی که قصد مهاجرت یا تحصیل در خارج از کشور را دارند میرسد این است که حال :


  ielts globe2


1. بهترین کلاس آیلتس کجاست ؟ بهترین استاد آیلتس کیست و برای انتخاب کلاس خوب آیلتس و استاد خوب آیلتس چه معیارهایی باید در نظر گرفته شود ؟


البته همیشه بهترین قضاوت کنندگان مردم هستند و در این مورد بهترین معیار نظر دانشجویان قبلی درباره اساتید آیلتس میتواند بهترین روش برای انتخاب استاد خوب آیلتس باشد و صد البته که مدارک تحصیلی و داشتن تحصیلات آکادمیک نظیر دکترا در زبان انگلیسی فاکتوری اجتناب ناپذیر است ولی مهمترین عامل در انتخاب یک دوره آیلتس خوب انتخاب یک استاد آیلتس با توانایی تدریس بالا در انتقال اطلاعات و کسی است که ذاتا معلم خوبی است و همچنین تدریس آیلتس برایش یک بیزنس نیست و با اهداف آموزشی و عاشقانه و دلسوزانه به دانشجویان آیلتس تدریس میکند و علاوه بر آن از کلمات تبلیغاتی نظیر کلاس آیلتس تضمینی ، آیلتس تضمینی ، بیمه آیلتس ، تضمین کتبی نمره آیلتس ، آیلتس ارزان ، آیلتس بدون آزمون و ... برای جذب مشتری و بدست آوردن پول هر چه بیشتر استفاده نمیکند و عملا نیازی هم نداره که استفاده بکند چون اساسا تعداد اساتید متخصص آیلتس واقعی در ایران و در دنیا انگشت شمار است و دانشجو باید به دنبال این اساتید برجسته آیلتس با ذره بین بگردد و امروزه با یک سرچ ساده در گوگل و خواندن کامنتهای دانشجویان و اساتید مکالمه زبان به راحتی پیدا کردن یک استاد خوب و با سابقه زبان مخصوصا برای دوره آیلتس امکان پذیر است و همچنین با سرچ کلمه استاد آیلتس در گوگل میتوان به راحتی بهترین استاد آیلتس  و با سابقه ترین استاد آیلتس را پیدا کرد.



2. آیا آیلتس تضمینی بهتر است یا کلاس تخصصی آیلتس ؟


کلاس تضمینی آیلتس از نظردکتر آرین کریمی بعنوان استاد با سابقه آیلتس فقط زمانی میتواند معنی داشته باشد که شرکت کننده آیلتس تمام تلاش خود را بکند و تمام انرژیی ، زمان و هزینه لازم را وقف آمادگی برای آزمون آیلتس نماید وگرنه هیچکدام از اساتید آیلتس قادر نیستند به جای متقاضی آیلتس درس بخوانند و گرامر و لغات زبان انگلیسی را حذف نمایند و به جای وی رایتینگ بنویسند و تست ریدینگ بزنند. بنابراین با نگاهی واقع بینانه کاملا مشهود است که آیلتس تضمینی وجود ندارد و به جای آن باید به دنبال کلاس تخصصی آیلتس و یک متخصص آیلتس خوب بود و همچنین دانشجوی پیگیر و فعالی بود و تمامی تکالیف آیلتس را که استاد آیلتس میدهد انجام داد.


فرمول آیلتس تضمینی و موفقیت در آیلتس از دیدگاه دکتر آرین کریمی




50 درصد سیستم آموزشی صحیح و متد تدریس آیلتس + 50 در صد تلاش دانشجوی آیلتس




موفقیت 100 % در آزمون آیلتس و تضمین نمره آیلتس مورد نیاز شما



3. بهترین دوره آیلتس کجا برگزار میشود ؟


مطمئنا بهترین دوره آیلتس در نزدیکترین محل به منزل شما برگزار نخواهد شد و این اصلا معیار خوبی برای انتخاب استاد خوب آیلتس یا مرکز خوب آیلتس نیست!


با وجودی که امروز بیش از سوپر مارکتهای هر محله آموزشگاه زبان وجود دارد ولی اکثر زبان آموزان و مخصوصا کسانی که برای آیلتس آماده میشوند از دورترین مراکز آیلتس و یا کلاس آنلاین آیلتس بهره میبرند چرا که مسافت آخرین فاکتور برای انتخاب یک کلاس خوب آیلتس است.


4. آزمون رسمی آیلتس چند وقت یکبار برگزار میشود و تقویم امتحانات آیلتس را کجا باید ببینم ؟


آزمون آیلتس تقریبا هر هفته در ایران برگزار میشه در چندین مرکز معتبر آیلتس که همه مورد تایید سازمان سنجش ایران هستند و مجوزهای لازم را از بریتیس کانسل یا آی دی پی استرالیا اخذ کرده اند که تقریبا همگی مجهز به هدست / هدفون پیشرفته هستند برای بخش شنیداری آیلتس و تقویم امتحانات و آزمونهای آیلتس را می توان به راحتی در وبسایت رسمی این سنترهای آیلتس چک کرد .برای ورود به وب سایت اصلی این مراکز و اطلاع از تاریخ آزمونهای آیلتس و همچنین تلفن و آدرس مراکز آیلتس ایران کلیک فرمایید.



5. حداقل نمره مورد نیاز آیلتس یا نمره قبولی آن چند است ؟


در آیلتس یک آزمون مهارت سنجی است و نمره خاصی به عنوان نمره قبولی وجود ندارد و تنها میزان آشنایی متقاضی را با زبان انگلیسی و سطح مهارت وی را در بکارگیری زبان انگلیسی در مهارتهای مختلف نظیر رایتینگ ریدینگ لیستنینگ و اسپیکینگ نشان میدهد و بهترین راه برای یادگیری مهارت های آیلتس شرکت در دوره تکنیک های آیلتس زیر نظر یک متخصص آیلتس میباشد . نمره آیلتس بین 0 تا 9 است که 9 بالاترین نمره در آزمون آیلتس و معادل نمره 20 در آزمونهای معمولی است و تقریبا نمره 3 در آیلتس نشان دهند عدم توانایی زبان آموز در زبان انگلیسی یا آشنایی خیلی مختصر با زبان است و هر چه به سقف نمره یعنی نمره 9 آیلتس نزدیک میشویم کسب بعضا 0.5 نمره هم مشکل میشود و نیاز به کلاس آیلتس  و راهنمایی های استاد آیلتس دارد. دانشجویانی که قبلا امتحان آیلتس داده اند و برای افزایش نمره آیلتس در یک مهارت خاص اقدام میکنند بهترین گزینه شرکت در دوره تک مهارت آیلتس / تک اسکیل آیلتس میباشد تا در کوتاه ترین زمان ممکنه حدودا 10 جلسه کلاس به سادگی نمره آیلتس خود را بهبود ببخشند.



6. معتبرترین موسسه آیلتس کدام است ؟


کلیه مراکز آیلتس که در این صفحه معرفی میشود مراکز معتبر آیلتس و مورد تایید سازمان سنجش ایران همچنین IDP استرالیا یا British council میباشند و تفاوت محسوسی بین آنها از نظر اعتبار وجود ندارد و تنها از نظر برگزاری آزمون و نظم و انظباط آزمون و امکانات ممکن است اندکی متفاوت باشند.



7. دکتر آرین کریمی کیست و چرا اکثر اساتید زبان وی را بعنوان بهترین استاد آیلتس تهران معرفی میکنند ؟


یکی از اساتید با سابقه آیلتس با 15 سال سابقه تدریس زبان انگلیسی و 12 سال سابقه تدریس آزمونهای بین المللی زبان انگلیسی نظیر آیلتس ، تافل ، جی آر ای ، سل پیپ ، پت و... که همواره کلاسهای تخصصی زبان انگلیسی و تربیت مدرس آیلتس یا همان تی تی سی آیلتس  را برگزار نموده و هزاران دانشجوی موفق آیلتس و تافل را در کارنامه تدریس خود دارد و تاکنون اساتید زبان ،آیلتس و تافل بسیاری را تربیت و به آموزشگاه های معتبر زبان و موسسات آموزشی معرفی نموده است .از این رو است که دانشجویان پیشین استاد و اساتید زبان بنام امروز به پاس قدردانی از دکتر آرین کریمی ایشان را به عنوان بهترین مدرس آیلتس و تافل ایران به دانشجویان خود جهت شرکت در کلاسهای آیلتس و تافل ایشان معرفی میکنند و ایشان را مورد لطف قرار میدهند.



8. دوره فشرده آیلتس چقدر طول میکشد ؟


دوره فشرده آیلتس معمولا میتواند در1 الی 6 ماه طی شود البته بستگی به سطح پایه زبان آموز و متقاضی آیلتس و همچنین نمره هدف ایشان در آزمون آیلتس و زمان آزاد برای مطالعه روزان و توانایی دانشجو برای درس خوان دارد و معمولا دوره فشرده آیلتس با توجه به شرایط متقاضی آیلتس تعریف و برنامه ریزی میشود. جهت مشاوره تخصصی آیلتس با دکتر آرین کریمی بصورت تلفنی یا حضوری با شماره های ذیل تماس حاصل فرمایید.



9. آیا برای شرکت در کلاس آیلتس باید سطح فعلی زبانم خیلی خوب باشد ؟


برای شرکت در دوره آیتلس دکتر کریمی نیازی به شرکت در کلاسهای عمومی متداول در آموزشگاه های زبان نیست و معمولا این دوره ها بصورتی طراحی می شود که دانشجوی آیلتس را از سطح فعلی زبان به نمره مورد نظر و هدف در آزمون آیلتس برساند. و دروس پیش نیاز آیلتس به اصطلاح پیری آیلتس همزمان با دوره آیلتس آموزش داده خواهد شد تا در کوتاه ترین زمان ممکن دانشجو برای آزمون آیلتس آمادگی کامل پیدا کند.


  • چطور و کجا آزمون تعیین سطح زبان بدهم ؟


برای شرکت در کلاسهای آیلتس و تافل دکتر آرین کریمی شما نیازی به شرکت در یک آزمون زبان انگلیسی ندارید و با گرفتن وقت مشاوره حضوری یا تلفنی به راحتی توسط دکتر کریمی سطح پایه زبان شما بصورت دقیق مشخص خواهد شد.


  • آزمون آیلتس آزمایشی یا ماک آیلتس چیست و کجا باید شرکت کنم ؟


به آزمونهای شبیه سازی شده آیلتس که توسط موسسات زبانی نظیر خانه آیلتس آفرینش ، موسسه زبان سفیر ، آموزشگاه زبان آریانپور و نظیر اینها برگزار میشود و با هزینه ای ناچیز میتوان شرکت نمود . ولی مشکل اینجاست که این آزمونها معمولا با آزمون واقعی آیلتس خیلی متفاوت هستند و قادر به تعیین سطح دقیق نیستند و معیار خوبی برای شرکت در دوره آیلتس نخواهند بود . برای تعییین سطح تخصصی با استاد آیلتس خود تماس بگیرید.



10. آیلتس آکادمیک با آیلتس جنرال چه فرقی دارد ؟


آیلتس جنرال ترینینگ معمولا برای مهاجرت و آیلتس آکادمیک برای اخذ پذیرش تحصیلی بکار میرود و این دو آزمون آیلتس با توجه به موارد مصرف در بعضی بخشهای آزمون با هم متفاوت هستند. ( در تسک 1 رایتینگ و در متن 1 و 2 بخش ریدینگ ). علاوه بر آن سطح عمومی آزمون آیلتس آکادمیک از نظر درجه سختی قدری بالاتر از آیلتس جنرال است.



11. آیا در خارج از ایران سنترها / مراکز آیلتس و ممتحن های آیلتس بهتر نمره میدهند ؟


تفاوت چندانی در آزمون های آیلتس داخل ایران و خارج از ایران نیست. فقط چون ممتحن های آیلتس در خارج از ایران معمولا نیتیو هستند ممکن است با دیدی متفاوت در بخشهای نظری مثل رایتینگ و اسپیکینگ نمره بدهند.



12. کدام کشور برای شرکت در آزمون آیلتس بهتر است ؟


آزمون آیلتس آزمونی بین المللی است و تقریبا در همه دنیا با یک سبک اجرا میشود و بانک سوالات در کشورهای مختلف میچرخد ولی معمولا دانشجویان آیلتس ترجیح میدهند در کشورهای همسایه ایران نظیر: ترکیه، ارمنستان، دبی و ... در آزمون آیلتس شرکت نمایند.



13. کدام مرکز آیلتس بهتر است و بهترین مرکز آیلتس کجاست ؟ آیلتس تهران ، آیلتس ایرسافام ، آیلتس دانشگاه آزاد ، آیلتس پروشات ، آیلتس خوارزمی یا آیلتس عصر دین و دانش؟


در واقع بهترین مرکز وجود ندارد و این امر کاملا سلیقه ای است ولی ترجیج دکتر آرین کریمی معمولا سنترهای قدیمی تر آیلتس نظیر آیلتس تهران و ایرسافام است.

سوالات آیلتس آکادمیک ازبکستان در فروردین ماه سال 1396


Academic IELTS exam questions was held in Uzbekistan in 2017


سوالات لیستنینگ آیلتس


IELTS Listening test 


Section 1. A telephone conversation about a damaged fridge delivery.

Section 2. Students discussed their project with a teacher.

Section 3, 4. Don’t remember.


سوالات ریدینگ آیلتس آکادمیک



IELTS Reading passages


Passage 1. About the history of tea and different tea ceremonies.

Passage 2. About Australian dingoes.

Passage 3. About a writer and his novels.

رایتینگ آیلتس آکادمیک



Writing test

تاپیک رایتینگ آیلتس آکادمیک تسک 1


Writing task 1 (a report)

We were given a line graph showing five trends and a pie chart with percentages in five categories. We had to summarize it.


موضوع رایتینگ آیلتس آکادمیک تسک 2


Writing task 2 (an essay)

Nowadays most big cities have high congestion and road traffic issues. What are the real causes for this? Suggest a solution that will help to relieve it.


نمونه سوالات اسپیکینگ آیلتس 


IELTS Speaking Exam


سوالات اینترویو در بخش 1 اسپیکینگ آیلتس



– What is your full name?

– Can I see your ID?

– Where are you from?

– Do you work or study?

– Describe a place you live in now.

– Let’s talk about mirrors.

– How often do you use a mirror?

– Did you ever buy a mirror?

– Are mirrors good for decoration?

– Why do you think so?

– Is secondary education necessary?

– What do you like or dislike about it?

سوالات کیو کارت در بخش 2 اسپیکینگ آیلتس


IELTS Speaking Cue Card Topic

Describe a well-paid job that you would like to do. Please say

– What job is it?

– Why do you want to do it?

– What would you do to get it?


سوالات فری دیسکاشن در بخش 3 اسپیکینگ آیلتس

IELTS Free Discussion Part


– Do you know someone doing such a job?

– What jobs are important in your opinion?

– Is it necessary to motivate employees to do their job?

– What is a good motivation in your opinion?

ثبت نام فوری دوره نیمه خصوصی آیلتس با دکتر آرین کریمی






دوره نيمه خصوصي تكنيكهاي آيلتس 7 آکادمیک با دكتر آرين كريمي


نيمه خصوصي ( 2 نفره ) با نصف هزينه


طول دوره 50 ساعت ( 25 جلسه 2 ساعته )


حداقل سطح پايه زبان جهت شركت در دوره آيلتس آکادمیک با هدف کسب نمره 7 اینترمدیت میباشد


تعداد صندلی خالی جهت رزرو : 2 


زمان انتظار جهت شروع دوره : 15 روز


( برنامه مطالعاتی دقیق توسط دکتر کریمی جهت آمادگی بیشتر برای شرکت در کلاس به دانشجو داده خواهد شد)


زمان شروع اين دوره آيلتس : به محظ تکمیل ظرفیت شروع خواهد شد


صفحه23 از38

تماس ( تا 12 شب )



با فیس تایم دکتر آرین کریمی استاد آیلتس تماس بگیرید



  ایران - تهران - بلوار فردوس شرق - روبروی گلستان شمالی - پلاک 244

  • اینستاگرام دکتر آرین کریمی
  • whatsapp
  • telegram

درباره استاد آرین ( دکتر آرین کریمی )


دکتر آرین کریمی با شهرت استاد آرین دارای مدرک بین المللی تدریس آیلتس از انگلستان ( IELTS Teaching Certificate ) و مدرک بین المللی تدریس زبان انگلیسی از انگلستان ( TESOL ) و با سالها تجربه در برگزاری دوره های موفق آمادگی آزمونهای بین المللی زبان انگلیسی نظیر آیلتس تافل جی آر ای و ... با ارائه جزوه منحصر بفرد خود و برنامه ریزی دقیق مطالعاتی و برگزاری جلسات رفع اشکال و تست زنی تاکنون دانشجویان بسیاری را تربیت و به خارج از کشور جهت اخذ پذیرش از دانشگاه های معتبر خارج از کشور و مهاجرت به کشورهایی نظیر آمریکا ،استرالیا ، انگلستان ، هند ، کانادا ، نیوزلند ، دبی ، آلمان ، ایتالیا ، سوئد ، قبرس ، مالزی ، ترکیه ، امارات متحده عربی ، هلند ، تایلند ، چین ، ژاپن ، کره جنوبی و دیگر کشورهای اروپایی و آماده نموده است . و همچنین با برگزاری دوره های تربیت مدرس آیلتس تاکنون اساتید زیادی را تعلیم و به آموزشگاهای معتبر زبان معرفی نموده است مقالات آموزش آیلتس و تافل دکتر کریمی...


JO Instagram Contact Button

خبرنامه سایت دکتر آرین کریمی

دریافت رایگان جدیدترین منابع آیلتس ، تافل و جی آر ای آخرین اخبار کارشناسی ، کارشناسی ارشد و دکترای دانشگاه سراسری ، دانشگاه آزاد و دانشگاه پیام نور.

  • Dr.Arian karimi facebook
  • اتصال به oovoo
  • اتصال به اسکایپ