NEW PTE Summarize Group Discussion: Task Introduction

PTE Summarize Group Discussion: Task Introduction

Summarize Group Discussion is a speaking task in PTE Academic where you listen to a discussion among three speakers on an academic topic, then summarize what each speaker said and how their views relate. It contributes to both Speaking and Listening scores.

Feature	Details
Number of Questions	2–3 per exam
Audio Length	Up to 3 minutes, played once
Preparation Time	10 seconds after the audio ends
Response Time	Up to 2 minutes
Scoring	Content (0–6), Oral Fluency (0–5), Pronunciation (0–5); partial credit
Score Contribution	Approximately 19% of Speaking and 20% of Listening
Critical Rule	You must summarize all three speakers accurately; missing one speaker's viewpoint costs Content points
Template Warning	Memorized templates or pre-prepared phrases score 0 for Content

Key Strategy: Set up your noteboard with sections for T (Topic), S1, S2, S3, R (Result/Conclusion) before the audio begins. Track who says what and how their views relate—agreement, disagreement, addition. Do not list keywords; connect ideas with linking words like "however," "in addition," and "as a result".

Template with Words and Phrases

Pearson explicitly warns against memorized templates. What follows is a sentence frame to fill with discussion-specific content.

Part	Sentence Frame	Example
Topic	"The discussion was based on [topic]."	"The discussion was based on campus facility problems."
Speaker 1	"To begin with, the first speaker [point/view], noting that [detail]."	"To begin with, the first speaker highlighted the shortage of quiet study rooms."
Speaker 2	"In addition, the second speaker [point/view], pointing out that [detail]."	"In addition, the second speaker complained about unreliable Wi-Fi."
Speaker 3	"The third speaker then [response/view], explaining that [detail]."	"The third speaker then confirmed that Wi-Fi upgrades were underway."
Conclusion	"Ultimately, the group concluded that [agreement/outcome], which is an important aspect of [broader field]."	"Ultimately, the group concluded that better feedback systems were needed, which is an important aspect of campus governance."

Useful transition phrases: "To begin with," "In addition," "Furthermore," "However," "On the other hand," "As a result," "Ultimately," "In the end".

Sample Set 1: Campus Facilities

Audio Script (Approx. 320 words):

Three speakers are discussing problems with campus facilities and possible improvements.

The first speaker, a student, begins by saying that the library is always full and there are not enough quiet study rooms. She explains that during exam periods she often has to wait for a seat, and she suggests the university should open more computer labs equipped with specialized software for engineering and design students.

The second speaker, another student, agrees with this and adds that the Wi-Fi connection in older buildings is unreliable. She says she often loses connection during online tutorials and has to move to another building. She also complains that the campus gym is outdated, with broken equipment that has not been replaced for years.

The third speaker, who works as an IT officer at the university, responds to these concerns. He explains that the Wi-Fi upgrade is already in progress and should be completed by the end of the semester. He promises to pass on the feedback about computer labs and the gym to the relevant departments. However, he notes that budget constraints mean improvements may take time.

Later in the discussion, both students express frustration that improvements always seem to take too long. They suggest that the university should create a better feedback system, such as a student committee or regular suggestion boxes, so that students can see what is being done about their concerns.

The IT officer acknowledges this point and agrees that communication could be improved. He explains that feedback channels already exist through the student union, but he admits that many students are not aware of them. He emphasizes that student input is essential for shaping future projects and encourages the students to get involved.

In the end, all three speakers agree that while some improvements are underway, the university needs to communicate more clearly with students about facility upgrades and timelines.

Short Notes:

• T: Campus facility problems and improvements
• S1: Not enough quiet study rooms; needs more computer labs with software
• S2: Wi-Fi unreliable in old buildings; gym outdated/broken
• S3 (IT officer): Wi-Fi upgrade underway; will pass feedback to departments; budget constraints
• Later: Students want better feedback system (committee/suggestion box)
• S3: Feedback channels exist via student union but unclear; student input important
• R: Need clearer communication about upgrades/timelines

Model Answer (Approx. 180 words, for 2 minutes):

The discussion was based on problems with campus facilities and possible improvements. To begin with, the first speaker highlighted the shortage of quiet study rooms and called for more computer labs with specialized software. In addition, the second speaker pointed out that Wi-Fi in older buildings is unreliable and complained that the gym is outdated and poorly maintained. The third speaker, who works as an IT officer, then responded that Wi-Fi upgrades are already in progress and promised to pass feedback about the labs and gym to the relevant departments, though he noted budget constraints. Later, both students expressed frustration that improvements take too long and suggested a better feedback system, such as a student committee or suggestion boxes. The IT officer acknowledged this concern and explained that feedback channels exist through the student union, but admitted that many students are unaware of them. Ultimately, the group concluded that clearer communication between students and administration is needed regarding facility upgrades and timelines, which is an important aspect of campus governance.

Sample Set 2: Academic Advising Appointments

Audio Script (Approx. 310 words):

Three students are discussing the difficulties they face when trying to book appointments with academic advisors.

The first speaker explains that finding an available time slot is almost impossible. She says the online booking system often shows no available times at all, and when slots do appear, they are usually at inconvenient hours such as early morning or late afternoon. She has missed two deadlines because she could not get an appointment in time.

The second speaker agrees and clarifies why this happens. She explains that during registration weeks, hundreds of students try to book appointments at the same time, which overloads the system almost immediately. She suggests that the university should stagger the booking process or add more appointment slots during peak periods.

The third speaker mentions that she tried calling the department directly, but that did not help either. The staff member she spoke to told her to use the online system, without offering any alternative. She suggests that the university may simply need to hire more advisors to meet student demand.

Later, the first and third speakers argue that short questions should not require a full thirty-minute meeting. They suggest that a quick question drop-in session or a faster email response system would solve many problems. However, the second speaker points out that email replies are also slow, sometimes taking over a week.

The second speaker then mentions that she has heard the university is planning new options, such as designated quick question slots and a special email system for simple enquiries. All three agree that these changes would help.

In the end, the group concludes that the current system is too difficult to navigate and that the university must make the process easier so that students do not miss important deadlines.

Short Notes:

• T: Problems booking academic advising appointments
• S1: No available slots; inconvenient hours; missed deadlines
• S2: High demand during registration overloads system; suggests staggered booking/more slots
• S3: Calling department didn't help; suggests more advisors
• Later: S1 & S3 want quick question options (drop-in/email); S2 says email slow
• S2: New options planned: quick slots and special email
• R: System too difficult; must be easier to avoid missed deadlines

Model Answer (Approx. 185 words, for 2 minutes):

The discussion was based on students' difficulties in booking appointments with academic advisors. To start with, the first speaker explained that finding an available time slot is nearly impossible and that the few available slots are at inconvenient hours, causing her to miss deadlines. In addition, the second speaker clarified that the problem is worsened by high demand during registration weeks, which quickly overloads the system, and suggested staggered booking or more slots. The third speaker noted that calling the department did not help and suggested hiring more advisors. Later, the first and third speakers argued that short questions should not require a full meeting, proposing drop-in sessions or faster email replies, though the second speaker pointed out that email is also slow. The second speaker then mentioned that new options are being planned, including quick question slots and a dedicated email system. Ultimately, the group concluded that the process must become easier so that students do not miss important deadlines, which is an important aspect of student support services.

Sample Set 3: AI Ethics Lecture

Audio Script (Approx. 305 words):

Three students are discussing Dr. Chen's guest lecture on artificial intelligence and ethics, which they all attended earlier that week.

The first speaker says the lecture changed her perspective on data privacy. She explains that before the lecture, she had not fully considered how much personal data AI systems collect and how that data can be misused. She was particularly struck by Dr. Chen's argument that privacy is not just an individual concern but a social justice issue, because vulnerable communities are often disproportionately affected. She now plans to include ethical considerations in her own computer science project.

The second speaker focuses on a different part of the lecture. She explains that the section on algorithmic bias was especially clear because Dr. Chen used real examples, such as hiring algorithms that unintentionally discriminate against certain groups. She says these examples made the abstract concept concrete and helped her understand how technology can cause harm even when designers have good intentions. She has signed up for Dr. Chen's workshop to learn more.

The third speaker, who studies law, says she appreciated how Dr. Chen explained complex topics simply and answered questions with respect. She notes that the Q&A session felt more like an open dialogue than a formal lecture, because Dr. Chen engaged directly with students' concerns and admitted when she did not have all the answers. This honesty impressed the third speaker and made her consider how legal frameworks might address AI harms.

All three students agree that the Q&A session was the most engaging part of the lecture and that it felt like a genuine conversation rather than a one-way presentation.

In the end, they all feel inspired to think differently about technology, to incorporate ethics into their own studies, and to expect more from future guest speakers.

Short Notes:

• T: Dr. Chen's AI ethics lecture
• S1: Changed views on data privacy; privacy as social justice issue; will add ethics to her project
• S2: Algorithmic bias section clear; real examples of discrimination; signed up for workshop
• S3 (law student): Clear explanation; respectful Q&A; honesty impressed her; considering legal frameworks
• All agree: Q&A felt like open dialogue, not formal lecture
• R: Inspired to think differently, add ethics to studies, expect more from guest speakers

Model Answer (Approx. 182 words, for 2 minutes):

The discussion was based on how Dr. Chen's lecture on AI ethics affected three students academically. To begin with, the first speaker explained that the lecture changed her perspective on data privacy and motivated her to include ethical considerations in her own project. In addition, the second speaker highlighted that the section on algorithmic bias was especially effective because it used real examples of discrimination, and she has since signed up for Dr. Chen's workshop. The third speaker, a law student, praised Dr. Chen's ability to explain complex topics simply and her respectful Q&A style, which impressed her so much that she began considering legal frameworks for AI harms. All three students agreed that the Q&A session felt like an open dialogue rather than a formal lecture. Ultimately, they all felt inspired to think differently about technology, to incorporate ethics into their studies, and to expect more from future guest speakers, which is an important aspect of ethics education in technology fields.

Sample Set 4: Climate Responsibility

Audio Script (Approx. 290 words):

Three speakers are debating who should be responsible for taking action on climate change.

The first speaker begins by acknowledging that individual lifestyle changes do make a difference. She explains that reducing energy consumption, using public transport, and eating less meat all contribute to lower emissions. However, she argues that individual action alone is insufficient without wider systemic change. She believes that focusing only on personal responsibility lets governments and corporations off the hook.

The second speaker agrees with this and places primary responsibility on governments. She argues that voluntary action has not reduced emissions fast enough and calls for legally binding targets. She points out that governments have the power to regulate industry, invest in renewable energy, and create incentives for sustainable behavior. Without government leadership, she says, individual efforts will always be limited in impact.

The third speaker adds another dimension to the debate. She emphasizes that corporations must also be held accountable, alongside individuals and governments. She notes that a relatively small number of companies produce a large share of global emissions, and she argues that these companies should face stricter regulations and transparency requirements. She suggests that consumers can pressure corporations through their purchasing choices, but that regulation is ultimately more effective.

Later in the discussion, the speakers acknowledge that their views are complementary rather than contradictory. The first speaker says she agrees that governments and corporations have the most power to effect change, but she still believes individual habits matter. The second speaker agrees that corporate regulation is essential and says she had not emphasized it enough.

In the end, the group agrees that individuals, companies, and governments all have a role to play, and that all three levels must act simultaneously for climate policy to succeed.

Short Notes:

• T: Who is responsible for climate action?
• S1: Individual changes help but insufficient without systemic change
• S2: Governments must set legally binding emissions targets; voluntary action too slow
• S3: Corporations also accountable; small number produce large share of emissions; need regulation
• Later: Views complementary; S1 still values individual habits; S2 agrees corporate regulation essential
• R: All three levels—individuals, companies, governments—must act simultaneously

Model Answer (Approx. 178 words, for 2 minutes):

The discussion was based on who should bear responsibility for tackling climate change. To begin with, the first speaker acknowledged that individual lifestyle changes make a difference but argued that they are insufficient without systemic change. In addition, the second speaker placed primary responsibility on governments, calling for legally binding emissions targets because voluntary action has not reduced emissions quickly enough. The third speaker emphasized that corporations must also be held accountable, noting that a small number of companies produce a large share of emissions and should face stricter regulation. Later, the speakers acknowledged that their views were complementary rather than contradictory, with the first speaker still valuing individual habits and the second agreeing that corporate regulation is essential. Ultimately, the group concluded that individuals, companies, and governments all have a role to play and that all three levels must act simultaneously for climate policy to succeed, which is an important aspect of environmental governance.

Sample Set 5: Remote Work and Team Dynamics

Audio Script (Approx. 315 words):

Three colleagues are discussing the advantages and disadvantages of remote work, and whether it should continue as a permanent arrangement.

The first speaker is positive about remote work. She explains that it has greatly improved her work-life balance because she no longer spends two hours commuting each day. She also believes she is more productive at home, since she experiences fewer interruptions than in the office. She argues that companies should allow employees to work remotely as much as possible, as long as deadlines are met.

The second speaker takes a more cautious view. He agrees that remote work has some benefits, but he is concerned about its impact on team cohesion and collaboration. He explains that spontaneous conversations in the office often lead to creative ideas and solve problems quickly, and these interactions are lost when everyone works from home. He is also worried about younger employees, who may miss out on informal mentoring and learning by observing experienced colleagues.

The third speaker proposes a middle path. She suggests that a hybrid model—where employees work remotely some days and in the office on others—is the most sustainable long-term solution. She explains that hybrid arrangements preserve the flexibility and productivity benefits of remote work while maintaining opportunities for in-person collaboration and mentorship. She recommends that companies designate specific office days for team meetings and training.

Later in the discussion, the first speaker acknowledges that she misses the social aspect of office life and agrees that some in-person time is valuable. The second speaker admits that he would not want to return to full-time office work and sees the logic of a hybrid approach.

In the end, the group agrees that neither fully remote nor fully office-based work is ideal, and that a hybrid model offers the best balance for most organizations.

Short Notes:

• T: Advantages/disadvantages of remote work; should it continue?
• S1: Positive: better work-life balance, no commute, fewer interruptions, more productive; wants max remote
• S2: Cautious: team cohesion suffers; spontaneous conversations lost; younger employees miss mentoring
• S3: Hybrid model best: preserves flexibility + in-person collaboration; designate office days
• Later: S1 misses social aspect, agrees some office time valuable; S2 doesn't want full-time office, sees logic of hybrid
• R: Hybrid offers best balance for most organizations

Model Answer (Approx. 180 words, for 2 minutes):

The discussion was based on the advantages and disadvantages of remote work and whether it should continue permanently. To begin with, the first speaker was positive, explaining that remote work improved her work-life balance, eliminated her commute, and increased her productivity due to fewer interruptions. In addition, the second speaker took a more cautious view, arguing that remote work weakens team cohesion, loses spontaneous creative conversations, and deprives younger employees of informal mentoring. The third speaker then proposed a hybrid model, suggesting that splitting time between home and office preserves flexibility while maintaining opportunities for collaboration and training. Later, the first speaker acknowledged missing the social aspect of office life, and the second speaker admitted he would not want to return to full-time office work. Ultimately, the group concluded that neither fully remote nor fully office-based work is ideal, and that a hybrid model offers the best balance for most organizations, which is an important aspect of modern workforce management.