PTE Summarize Group Discussion: how it works, how it is marked and practice

In Summarize Group Discussion, Pearson says you listen to a discussion between 3 people, then summarise it in your own words. You get 10 seconds to prepare and two minutes to speak. Pearson says the best answers name the main topic first, then add what each speaker said. The Pearson pages we read give no template, and its score guide treats pre-prepared or memorised material as irrelevant, so build every answer from the discussion you hear.

On the topics, Pearson says what to expect:

Pearson lists the skills this task covers as listening and speaking, and the traits as content, pronunciation and oral fluency.

The task is in PTE Academic, not in PTE Core. Pearson's Core speaking list has no group discussion task, and the Academic list does.

Pearson explains what content means in this task. It is more than a list of what was said:

Pearson's score guide describes the top and middle content levels in more detail. At the top it says:

The next band down describes responses that note only some relationships, and a middle band describes responses that miss the direction of the conversation:

Two more points from Pearson. First, only your own words count. Second, the mark is checked by a person as well as the AI.

Our reading: the three speakers are the structure. A good answer says what the discussion is about, what each person thinks and why, how their views connect, and where the conversation ends up.

Pearson gives you 10 seconds to prepare and two minutes to speak, and tells you to include all the main points and to keep talking. Here is a way to share the time. The times are our suggestion, not a Pearson rule.

Pearson says you can take notes while the audio plays, and the audio plays once. You cannot write sentences, so write a three-column grid with one or two key words in each cell.

Our grid. Draw it before the audio starts: Speaker (a label such as 1, 2, 3 or the first name) / Position (for, against, mixed, new idea) / Reason (one or two key words, such as cost, safety, far away).

Write the speaker's position first, then the reason, and add a tick when a later speaker answers an earlier one. Those ticks become your relationship sentences at the end. Do not copy words you cannot spell quickly. Use a symbol, such as + for agree and - for disagree.

Many websites sell a Summarize Group Discussion template as a paragraph you memorise and fill in. Pearson's score guide says what happens to a response built mostly from memorised material:

An irrelevant response gets no content mark. Pearson's integrity paper goes further. It says that for Describe Image and Retell Lecture, the two speaking item types it covers, the templates it sees are often fragmented and repetitive, combined with fully memorized introductory and concluding sentences, and that any template that relies on long passages of memorized pre-scripted material is considered gaming. Pearson's test integrity paper (November 2024) says its detection system was designed for Write Essay, Describe Image and Retell Lecture, and it does not name Summarize Group Discussion, so nobody outside Pearson can promise any frame is safe. Pearson publishes no list of allowed phrases. So do not memorise a paragraph, and never open or close with the same sentence every time. Below are the short linking phrases we use. They are our suggestion, not Pearson's, and each one is only a thinking aid: you fill it with what you actually heard.

Notice what is missing: any actual topic content. The frames do not know what the discussion is about. That part has to come from what you hear, and it is the trait Pearson lists first. Keep the frames to a small set and vary them, so your speech does not sound like the same paragraph every time. A frame is a thinking aid, not a script.

Our practice discussion. Have it read once at a normal pace, with a pause between speakers. Take notes while you listen, take 10 seconds, then speak for no more than two minutes. Our discussion is shorter than a full-length audio, so once you can handle it, practise with longer three-person conversations such as a panel podcast.

• Anna: During exam week, many of us study late at night, because we work during the day. If the library stayed open all night, we would have a quiet place with computers and no pressure to leave at midnight. I think it would reduce stress and improve results.
• Ben: I see the benefit, but I am worried about cost and safety. The university would need extra staff and security, and walking home at three in the morning is not safe for everyone. Maybe it would be better to open until two a.m. and add a campus shuttle.
• Carla: I agree with both of you in part. But what about students who cannot reach the library at all, because they live far away? Perhaps the university should open more quiet rooms in the student residences, and keep the library open late only for the final two weeks of term.
• Anna: That is fair. A shuttle would solve the safety problem for me, and I would happily pay a small fee if it helped. But rooms in the residences would only be useful if they have computers and printers.
• Ben: I like Carla's idea of using the residences. It costs less than staffing the whole library all night, and it helps the students who live far away. We could still keep the library open until two a.m. in the last two weeks.
• Carla: So we all agree on late-night study space. The disagreement is only about how much to spend and where to put it. I would start with the residences as a trial this term.

Notes you might make while listening

The key points your answer should cover

• Topic: should the library stay open all night during exams?
• Anna: for the idea, because students work by day and study at night, and a quiet library reduces stress.
• Ben: sees a benefit, but is worried about cost, extra staff, and the safety of walking home late. Suggests closing at two a.m. and adding a shuttle.
• Carla: agrees in part, points out students who live far away, and proposes quiet rooms in the residences and long hours only in the last two weeks.
• The replies: Anna welcomes the shuttle and would pay a small fee, but says residence rooms would only help if they have computers and printers, and Ben likes the residences because they cost less.
• Relationship and close: Ben and Carla both respond to Anna's idea. All three want late study space but differ on cost and place, and Carla suggests a trial in the residences.

A model summary (our example)

At a steady pace this model takes roughly 70 seconds to say (our estimate), well inside the two minutes. In a real test, add one more detail per speaker if you have time left, and keep talking until the time is up.

The discussion is about whether the university library should stay open all night during exams. Anna supports the idea, because many students work during the day and study at night, and a quiet library would reduce stress and could improve results. Ben sees the benefit but is concerned about the cost of extra staff and security, and about students walking home late, so he suggests closing at two a.m. and adding a shuttle. Carla partly agrees with both of them. She points out that some students live too far away to use the library, and proposes quiet study rooms in the residences, with longer library hours only in the last two weeks. In reply, Anna says the shuttle would solve the safety problem for her and she would pay a small fee, but residence rooms would only help if they have computers and printers, and Ben likes the residence idea because it costs less. Overall, the speakers agree that students need late-night study space, but they differ on how much to spend and where to put it, and Carla suggests a trial in the residences this term.

• It opens with the topic in one sentence.
• It gives each speaker a clear position and a reason, in different words from the script.
• It shows how the views relate: Ben is concerned about Anna's idea, Carla partly agrees with both, and the replies move them closer together.
• It ends with one sentence on what the speakers share and where they differ.
• It is a model for structure, not a script to memorise. Use the same shape on a new discussion, but never reuse these sentences in a test.

• Retelling instead of summarising. Reading the speakers' sentences back in the same words is what Pearson says will hurt your score.
• Giving only one speaker's view. The task has three speakers and the content is marked on each one.
• Forgetting the relationships. A list of three separate opinions misses what the speakers say to each other.
• Spending too long on speaker 1 and running out of time before speaker 3.
• Memorising a template paragraph. The score guide classifies memorised material as irrelevant.
• Stopping to correct a word. Pearson says to keep talking and ignore small mistakes.
• Starting before the microphone opens. Your first words are not recorded.

Pearson's AI practice also has a free tier with one Speaking and Writing diagnostic. For a full mock test with scoring, see the paid options on our PTE books, courses and tips page. For habits that raise a speaking mark in general, see PTE speaking tips, and for a short practice set across the other speaking tasks, see the PTE speaking practice test. This page is not immigration advice, and Pearson's own pages decide the rules.

Common questions