Which mistakes cost marks in TCF Canada speaking task 3?
Checked November 3, 2026
Task 3 lasts 4 min 30, with no preparation, and you defend a point of view with examples. The mistakes that cost most are never saying clearly what you think, listing arguments with no concrete example, ignoring the opposing view and stopping after 2 minutes. The France Éducation international (FEI) handbook expects a clear, structured argument, pros and cons, then a conclusion.
Task 3 is the longest of the three and the only one where you speak almost alone. No preparation, a social question, and an examiner who may cut in to ask for detail. In our view, this is where how you build the answer counts most, as much as the language itself.
Each mistake carries a label. “Named by FEI” means the candidate handbook names it. “Our reading” means it is our interpretation of the speaking skills the handbook lists, giving an opinion, explaining pros and cons, presenting a clear and structured argument, developing it and concluding.
| Mistake | Status |
|---|---|
| No clear position | Our reading |
| Arguments with no example | Our reading |
| An example that proves nothing | Our reading |
| Ignoring the opposing view | Our reading |
| A recited introduction | Named by FEI |
| Stopping after 2 minutes | Our reading |
| Backing down after the examiner’s question | Our reading |
| Filler sentences | Our reading |
The examples follow a made-up question. « Faut-il apprendre à programmer dès l’école primaire ? » Should children learn to code in primary school?
No clear position
Fautif. C’est une question intéressante. Il y a des avantages et des inconvénients. Ça dépend des enfants, ça dépend des écoles…
(It’s an interesting question, there are pros and cons, it depends on the children, it depends on the schools.) After thirty seconds the examiner still doesn’t know what you think. Nuance is good, but not instead of a position. State your view in the first sentences, the nuance comes later.
Corrigé. Pour moi, oui, il faut commencer tôt, mais sous forme de jeu, pas comme un cours d’informatique classique.
(Yes, start early, but as a game, not as a classic computer class.)
Arguments with no example
Fautif. D’abord, c’est utile pour l’avenir. Ensuite, ça développe la logique. Enfin, tous les métiers utilisent l’informatique.
(It’s useful for the future, it builds logic, every job uses computers.) Three arguments in fifteen seconds, then nothing left to say. One argument followed by a concrete example, from your own life if possible, beats three bare ones.
Corrigé. D’abord, ça développe la logique. Mon neveu a neuf ans et il fait de petits jeux de programmation à l’école. Pour faire avancer un robot, il doit découper le problème en étapes, et je vois qu’il fait pareil maintenant pour ses devoirs de maths.
(My nine-year-old nephew codes small games at school, has to break problems into steps to move a robot, and now does the same with his maths homework.)
An example that proves nothing
The example has to show the argument, not just touch the same theme.
Fautif. La programmation, c’est important pour l’avenir. Par exemple, mon frère est ingénieur dans l’aéronautique.
(Coding matters for the future, for example my brother is an aerospace engineer.) It is unclear what the brother’s job proves about primary school. Link the example to the argument with one sentence.
Corrigé. Mon frère est ingénieur, et il me dit que les jeunes qui ont appris à programmer tôt comprennent plus vite les outils qu’on leur donne. C’est pour ça que je pense que l’école primaire est le bon moment.
(He says young people who learned early pick up new tools faster, which is why primary school is the right time.)
Ignoring the opposing view
The handbook lists expressing agreement or disagreement and explaining pros and cons. An answer that only argues its own side shows half of that. Name the objection, then answer it.
Corrigé. Bien sûr, certains diront que les enfants passent déjà trop de temps devant les écrans. C’est vrai, mais on peut apprendre la programmation sans écran, avec des cartes ou des jeux de société. Ce qui compte, c’est la façon de raisonner.
(Some will say children already spend too long on screens. True, but coding can be taught without screens, with cards or board games. What matters is the way of thinking.)
A recited introduction
« De nos jours, à l’ère du numérique, la question de… suscite de nombreux débats dans notre société. » (Nowadays, in the digital age, the question of… sparks much debate in our society.) An opening like this is easy to spot and says nothing about the topic. The FEI handbook says the examiner may interrupt if they think you are reciting, and that a memorised text could get the test rated “A1 non atteint” (details). Restate the question in your own words, then give your view.
Stopping after 2 minutes
Position, two arguments, conclusion, and more than 2 minutes are left. Silence earns nothing, and the examiner has to prompt you. Keep something in reserve to go on without reciting.
- A third argument, even a short one.
- A second example, from another country or another person.
- A comparison between your home country and Canada.
- A condition, what would make you change your mind.
The five-step plan with suggested timings is on the speaking task 3 page.
Backing down after the examiner’s question
Examinateur. Et les enfants qui ont du mal à lire, ce n’est pas trop pour eux ?
Fautif. Oui, vous avez raison, ce n’est pas une bonne idée.
(And children who struggle to read, isn’t it too much for them? Yes, you’re right, it’s not a good idea.) In one sentence the candidate drops the whole position. The examiner’s question is not a trap, it is a chance to add nuance. Accept the limit, then show your view still holds.
Corrigé. C’est une vraie difficulté. Pour ces enfants, je commencerais par des activités sans texte, avec des images. Ça ne change pas mon avis, mais ça montre qu’il faut adapter l’activité à l’âge et au niveau.
(A real difficulty. I would start them with picture-based activities. It doesn’t change my view, it shows the activity has to fit age and level.)
Filler sentences
« C’est très important », « ça dépend », « chacun a son avis », « il y a du pour et du contre » (it’s very important, it depends, everyone has their opinion, there are pros and cons). These fill time without moving the argument. One or two are fine, one per sentence is not. Replace them with a fact, a reason or an example, and link ideas with real connectors (speaking connectors).
Before test day
- Pick a question from the list by theme and speak for 4 min 30 without preparing, recording yourself.
- On playback, note the second at which your position is clear.
- For each argument, check it has an example and that the example proves it.
- Find the objection. If there is none, do the same question again.
A full answer that avoids these mistakes is in the task 3 sample. NCLC Prep grades writing, not speaking. Written task 3 follows a similar logic, and you can have a written task corrected there, with a limited free trial.