OET Listening Part C：話し手の意見・理由・例を追い、言い過ぎの選択肢を見抜く方法

OET Listening Part Cでは、約5分の録音を2つ聞きます。プレゼンテーションかインタビューです。多くの問題は、話し手が何を考え、なぜそう考え、どのくらい強く言っているかを問います。それぞれの文が誰の意見かを追い、意見が変わるときに付く限定に注意し、例がどの要点を支えているかを考えましょう。そのうえで、主張を誇張したもの、逆にしたもの、別の人の意見にすり替えたものを除外します。この記事は、英語が中上級（B2）以上の看護師と医師を対象にしています。

この記事が向いている人

Part Cのインタビューの内容はわかるのに、意見や態度の問題で点を落とす看護師・医師。
聞こえた単語をいちばん多く繰り返している選択肢を選びがちな受験者。
会議や申し送りで、同僚の意見も正確に伝える必要がある専門職。
まだ早い：短い職場の録音がまだ難しければ、Part Bのガイドから始めましょう（下のリンク）。
簡単すぎる：Part Cの答えがすでに安定しているなら、OET Readingに進み、4つの短い文章から細部を探す練習から始めましょう（下のリンク）。

サンプルページを開く

単語カード

Personal · changing your mind

Tell me about a time you changed your mind about a new idea or procedure at work. What convinced you, and were there conditions?

Useful: ‘At first I was sceptical because…’ · ‘What changed my mind was…’ · ‘I’m in favour now, as long as…’

Professional practice · checking understanding

How do you check that a patient or colleague has really understood you, without making them feel tested?

Useful: ‘What I usually do is…’ · ‘Rather than asking “Do you understand?”, I…’ · ‘It depends on the person, but…’

Professional practice · plain language

Is plain language always the best choice with patients, or are there times when a professional term is more useful?

Useful: ‘In most cases…, although…’ · ‘A professional term can be useful when…’ · ‘The risk of simplifying too much is…’

Big idea · evidence and change

How much evidence should a team need before it changes the way it works? Is a small local trial ever enough?

Useful: ‘It isn’t proof, but it does suggest…’ · ‘I’d want to see… before…’ · ‘That depends on how risky…’

会話

Owen Maya, your team tried a new visitor-information sheet. What were your expectations before the trial?

Maya One colleague was very enthusiastic. She thought a single clear sheet would immediately reduce the number of questions at reception. I was less certain. We already had quite a lot of written information, so I wanted to know whether this version would actually help visitors find what they needed. I was not against the idea; I simply did not want the team to judge it by how tidy it looked on our desks.

Owen What did you notice once people began using it?

Maya The most useful change was with practical questions. Visitors could find where to wait, who to contact about a booking and where to ask for language support. Staff were still available, but the opening part of the conversation was sometimes easier because the visitor had a clearer starting point. That made me more positive about keeping it. It did not mean the sheet could deal with every concern. When somebody had several connected questions, a conversation was still needed.

Owen Did everyone interpret that result in the same way?

Maya Not quite. A few colleagues focused on the number of copies we handed out. I understood why that was easy to count, but distribution alone did not show whether the sheet had been understood. We found it more useful to ask what visitors could locate and what they still found unclear. One person might take a copy without reading it; another might use the same copy throughout a visit.

Owen What would you advise a team trying something similar?

Maya Treat the sheet as one part of communication, not a replacement for people. Keep the practical information concise, make it easy to ask for help and review the feedback. Our next step is to revise two headings that visitors sometimes confuse. I would not claim that the trial settled every question about written information. It gave us a useful local starting point and a way to notice where further explanation was needed.

文の形

1
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
A colleague, Arjun Mehta, ______ time: fewer phone calls from patients who had forgotten what was said, and fewer repeated questions at the next visit.
答えと解説を見る
expected the summaries to save
Expect + object + to-infinitive reports what someone believed would happen.
2
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
The first results were mixed, and Helena ______ they were more interesting than she had expected.
答えと解説を見る
admits
Admit (that) + clause reports something a person accepts, often reluctantly; deny would reverse her view, and refuse needs a to-infinitive.
3
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
“Before the trial, I ______ both of those patients had understood,” she says.
答えと解説を見る
would have assumed
Would have + past participle describes what would have happened in a past situation that did not happen (without the trial).
4
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
Arjun, who had championed the idea from the start, was disappointed that the time saved was smaller than he ______.
答えと解説を見る
had hoped
The past perfect (had hoped) refers to a hope that existed before the disappointing result.
5
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
Two receptionists ______ many of the calls had simply moved.
答えと解説を見る
argued that
Argue that + clause reports a view someone gives reasons for; argue to and argue about that are not used before a clause.
6
Choose the words that complete the sentence from the article.
She supports continuing the summaries, ______ the team reviews a sample of them every month and rewrites any heading that patients repeatedly misunderstand.
答えと解説を見る
as long as
As long as introduces a condition: her support depends on the monthly review. As soon as is about time; as well as means ‘in addition to’.

追加の練習

Model the strategy before practice

Whose view is it?

Attribution matters even when the vocabulary sounds positive.
My colleague expected the new system to save time, but I was uncertain. The expectation belongs to the colleague; uncertainty belongs to the speaker.

A qualified change

A speaker can become more positive without claiming every problem is solved.
It helped with routine queries, although complex questions still needed discussion. The improvement is limited to a particular use.

Topic signals

Listen for a change of focus before linking a question to an answer.
Turning to the feedback tells you the next section is about responses, not the original plan.

Choose and justify with evidence

1
How did Maya initially differ from her colleague?
答えと解説を見る
She was less confident that the proposed change would help
Her colleague expected an immediate improvement, while Maya wanted to see whether visitors could use the information in practice.
2
What changed Maya’s view?
答えと解説を見る
Evidence that routine questions became easier to handle
She noticed visitors could locate basic practical details more easily, while some issues still required a conversation.
3
What does she recommend now?
答えと解説を見る
Keeping the sheet alongside conversation and reviewing feedback
Her position is qualified: retain the useful sheet as one part of communication and continue reviewing what visitors find unclear.

Model the strategy before practice

Example as evidence

Ask what general point the example illustrates.
One visitor could repeat the time but not the location. This can illustrate partial understanding, rather than a problem with every date.

Reason versus result

A reason explains why a change was made; a result describes what happened afterward.
We revised the headings because people overlooked them. More people then found the right section. The overlooked headings are the reason.

Scope of a conclusion

A small local example supports a limited conclusion.
This trial helped our team identify confusing wording. It does not prove that the same wording will work in every setting.

After listening: full transcript

Maya Today I want to discuss a small change in how our centre checks that practical arrangements have been understood. The aim is not to test visitors or make them feel that they have failed. It is to notice whether our explanation has done its job, and to make room for questions before the person leaves.

Maya Here is an example from our training exercise. A visitor could repeat the correct date of an appointment, and the staff member assumed that everything was clear. When the visitor described where they planned to go, however, it became apparent that they had confused two buildings. Remembering the date had not meant understanding the whole arrangement. We used that example to discuss the limits of checking only one easily repeated detail.

Maya The team had often ended with a broad question such as whether everything was clear. That is a friendly question, but a short yes did not tell us much about what the person had understood. We tried a more specific invitation: asking the visitor to explain the practical plan in their own words, while making clear that we were checking our explanation. This sometimes revealed a point that needed another sentence or a simpler phrase.

Maya There was a concern that this would turn every exchange into a long interview. In our training discussions, the answer was to focus on what mattered for that situation. It might be the place and time, the person to contact or the way to request further help. We were not asking staff to go through a fixed list regardless of the visitor’s needs.

Maya That qualification is important. A respectful conversation depends on the person in front of you. Someone may already have explained their understanding naturally, while another person may want information in a different form or language. The useful principle is to make understanding visible enough to notice a problem, then respond appropriately. The example helps us think about communication; it is not a rule that one identical sentence must be used with everyone.

Choose and justify with evidence

1
Why does the speaker mention a visitor who repeated the correct date?
答えと解説を見る
To show that repeating one detail does not prove complete understanding
The example contrasts correct recall of a date with misunderstanding of another practical detail.
2
Why did the team change the wording of its final question?
答えと解説を見る
To invite visitors to explain their understanding more specifically
A broad yes/no question gave little information; a more specific invitation revealed what the visitor understood.
3
What is the speaker’s main qualification?
答えと解説を見る
The approach should be adapted to the person and situation
The speaker rejects a rigid test-like script and emphasises respectful adaptation to the person’s needs.

Model the strategy before practice

A repeated keyword is not proof

The option must match the speaker’s whole claim.
The speaker mentions cost but says reliability was decisive. An option claiming cost was the only reason is unsupported.

Watch for overstatement

Always, completely and everyone can turn a limited observation into a false claim.
Some staff found it useful does not mean every member of staff preferred it.

Support and rejection

A strong explanation identifies both why the key fits and why the closest alternative does not.
The key preserves the condition if feedback remains positive. The alternative removes that condition and claims an unconditional decision.

After listening: full transcript

Maya Owen, why did your team try a shared administrative handover summary?

Owen The main issue was finding practical information consistently. One colleague might put a room change in an email, while another noted it only in a personal notebook. We were spending time asking where the latest detail had been recorded. We discussed cost, of course, but choosing the cheapest possible tool was not the main purpose. We wanted a clear place for the small set of details that several colleagues needed.

Maya Did that mean replacing the spoken handover?

Owen No. That was a concern raised at the beginning, and we tried to address it explicitly. The summary was intended to support a conversation, not remove it. A short written entry can show a practical change, but it cannot answer every follow-up question or explain every unusual circumstance. We still expected colleagues to speak to one another when clarification was needed.

Maya How did staff respond?

Owen The feedback was mixed in a useful way. Some colleagues liked being able to find the same headings each time. Others felt that two headings overlapped and were unsure where to put an update. That did not tell us that everyone preferred the new approach, but it also did not mean the whole idea had failed. It gave us specific information about what to revise. We asked for examples of confusing entries rather than just a vote for or against the template.

Maya What have you decided to do next?

Owen We will combine the two overlapping headings and continue the trial within the same team. After that, we will review whether colleagues can locate the information more easily. Only then will we consider whether a wider rollout makes sense. I would be cautious about presenting a local trial as a finished solution. The benefit is promising, but the next decision needs to depend on what the revised version actually helps people do.

Choose and justify with evidence

1
Why did the team choose a brief shared summary?
答えと解説を見る
Because key administrative details were hard to locate consistently
The problem was inconsistent access to practical details; cost was discussed but was not described as the decisive reason.
2
How does Owen interpret the mixed staff feedback?
答えと解説を見る
It identifies different needs that can guide a revision
He recognises both useful aspects and specific difficulties, treating feedback as evidence for changes rather than a simple unanimous verdict.
3
What decision has the team made?
答えと解説を見る
Continue a revised trial and review it before a wider rollout
The decision is limited and conditional: revise the template, continue locally and review before considering wider use.

Use the strategy in a new exchange

How can you correct an overstatement politely?

I would put it more cautiously: some colleagues found it useful, but we still need to revise the part they found confusing.

One possible formulation; other coherent and accurate responses are welcome.

Transfer brief

Choose a neutral communication process such as a shared summary or a staff message template.
Give one benefit and one unresolved difficulty.
Recommend a next step with a clear limit or condition.
Practise correcting phrases such as everyone agrees or the problem is completely solved.

Two rounds

Plan your wording and priorities.
Speak naturally and respond to your partner’s question.
Exchange specific feedback and improve one part in a shorter retry.

この単元を学ぶ

どの方法で学びますか？

アカウントをお持ちですか？

無料アカウントで1つの単元をずっと開いておけます。

Part Cで求められること

Part Cには約5分の録音が2つあります。医療従事者がプレゼンテーションをするか、インタビューに答えます。録音ごとに3択の問題が6問あり、録音は一度だけ流れます。話題は一般的なので、専門知識は必要ありません。

問題では、話し手の意見、態度、理由、または例を挙げた理由がよく問われます。録音の前に、各問題が誰についてのものかを書き込んでおきましょう。

誰の意見か

話し手は、自分の意見の前に他の人の意見を紹介することがよくあります。誰の意見かは文法が教えてくれます。

“A colleague expected the summaries to save time.” expect＋目的語＋to不定詞：他の人の予想で、まだ話し手の意見ではありません。
“Some staff argued that the form was too long.” 紹介された主張です。話し手が同意しているかを聞き取りましょう。
“I admit it took longer than we had hoped.” admitは、話し手が自分の立場に不利な点を認めている合図です。
“Most of us would have assumed it was simple.” would have＋過去分詞：当時おそらく考えていたことで、すぐに訂正されることが多い表現です。
“I was less certain.” ここからが話し手自身の意見です。

考えの変化には、たいてい限定が付く

話し手が反対から賛成へ一気に変わることはまれです。前向きになりながら条件を付け加え、正しい選択肢はその両方を含みます。まず転換を、次に限定を聞き取りましょう。

転換：“What changed my mind was…”、“That made me more positive about…”、“I’m in favour now, as long as…”。
限定：“That doesn’t mean…”、“although…”、“It isn’t proof, but it does suggest…”。
組み合わせると：“At first I was sceptical. I’m in favour now, as long as we review it.”

聞いてみよう：誰の意見？

インタビュアーがあるスタッフに、チームが来訪者向けの新しい案内シートを試す前に何を期待していたかを尋ねます。2つの意見を一度だけ聞きましょう。

インタビュアー Maya, your team tried a new visitor-information sheet. What were your expectations before the trial?

回答者 One colleague was very enthusiastic. She thought a single clear sheet would immediately reduce the number of questions at reception. I was less certain. We already had quite a lot of written information, so I wanted to know whether this version would actually help visitors find what they needed. I was not against the idea; I simply did not want the team to judge it by how tidy it looked on our desks.

試行の前、彼女はどんな態度でしたか？

自分に合った方法でこの単元を学ぶ

例は何を示しているか

Part Cでは、話し手がなぜ例を挙げたのかが問われることがあります。答えは例が支えている要点で、その要点はたいてい範囲が限られています。

“One visitor repeated the correct date but went to the wrong building.” 要点：細部をひとつ言えても、予定全体を理解した証拠にはなりません。
“We revised the headings because people overlooked them.” becauseは変更の結果ではなく理由を示します。
“This trial helped our team find confusing words.” ひとつのチームについての主張で、「書面の情報はどこでも効果がある」という意味ではありません。

Part Cのよくある間違い

誤りの選択肢は、話し手の言葉をそのまま使っていることがよくあります。主張全体を確かめましょう。

言い過ぎ：“some staff found it useful” が “everyone found it useful” になる。always、every、neverなどに注意。
逆転：“we discussed cost, but it wasn’t the main reason” が “the main reason was cost” になる。
すり替え：同僚の意見や、話し手が退けた意見が、話し手自身の意見として示される。
“seems”、“tends to”、“in our clinic” のような控えめな表現を聞き逃す：正しい選択肢はこの限定を保っています。
日本語では「〜と思った」「〜と言った」のように、人の考えを伝える表現が文の最後に来ますが、英語では “she thought”、“they argued” がたいてい文の最初に来ます。文の出だしを聞き逃さないようにしましょう。

20分のPart Cルーティン

模擬試験のPart Cの録音をひとつ使います。

3分：問題を読み、各問題が誰についてのものかに印を付ける。
5分：録音を一度だけ聞いて答える。
8分：スクリプトで確認し、根拠に下線を引き、誤りの選択肢ごとに理由を書く：言い過ぎ、逆転、別の人の意見、単なる例。
4分：話し手の最終的な意見を限定とともに声に出して言う：“She’s in favour, as long as…”。

次のステップ

学習仲間と話し合ってみましょう。チームが仕事のやり方を変える前に、どのくらいの根拠が必要でしょうか。小規模な現場の試行だけで十分なことはあるでしょうか。“It isn’t proof, but it does suggest…” を使ってみましょう。

OET Readingでは、同じ力が文章で問われます。短い録音がまだ難しければ、Part Bに戻りましょう。

よくある質問

OET Listening Part Cは何問ですか？

12問です。2つの録音にそれぞれ3択の問題が6問あります。Listening全体は3パート、42問です。

Part Cの意見問題をなぜ間違えるのでしょうか？

選んだ選択肢が別の人に当てはまる、話し手の主張より強い、または要点ではなく例について述べている、という場合がよくあります。

Part Cに医学知識は必要ですか？

いいえ。話題は医療分野ですが、答えはすべて話し手の発言から導けます。

次の練習を探す

FlalingoはOETを運営する団体と提携しておらず、それらの団体から推奨や承認を受けていません。

OET Listening Part C：話し手の意見・理由・例を追い、言い過ぎの選択肢を見抜く方法

この記事が向いている人

サンプルページを開く

単語カード

会話

文の形

追加の練習

Model the strategy before practice

Choose and justify with evidence

Model the strategy before practice

After listening: full transcript

Choose and justify with evidence

Model the strategy before practice

After listening: full transcript

Choose and justify with evidence

Use the strategy in a new exchange

Part Cで求められること

誰の意見か

考えの変化には、たいてい限定が付く

聞いてみよう：誰の意見？

例は何を示しているか

Part Cのよくある間違い

20分のPart Cルーティン

次のステップ

よくある質問

次の練習を探す

次は何をしましょうか？

Flaiで練習を続けよう

ライブの先生と学ぶ