TOEFL Speaking: The Missing Business Connection Behind a 2.8/5 Response
The (German) speaker uses the word “insolvent,” even names a specific German railway company, and presents a clear positive point followed by a negative point. Ugh. The response still receives 2.8/5 on My Speaking Score, with partial coverage. What's going on here?
The central issue is the connection between the example and the question. The speaker explains a negative effect on a business. The positive point describes a benefit for individual commuters, leaving the business benefit unexplained.
The question
“Good points. Lastly, considering advances in technology, some people believe that commuting might disappear entirely. How do you think a severe decline in commuting might affect businesses in positive ways and negative ways? Please give one example of each.”
The answer needs a positive effect on businesses and a negative effect on businesses, with an example of each. Mentioning commuting throughout the response does not automatically satisfy those requirements. Each example needs to establish a business consequence.
The response at a glance
| Measure | Result |
|---|---|
| MSS response score | 2.8/5 |
| Speaking pace | 97 words per minute |
| Word count | 73 words |
| Coverage | Partial |
| Response window | 45 seconds |
The original response
“Well, the most positive thing in Germany especially would be that everyone um would wouldn't be entirely um depend dependent on the Deutsche Bahn. So, on the train company, which would be a good point because there are severely um delays caused in Germany. But one negative point would be that the Deutsche Bahn, aka the German train railway service, would get um wouldn't earn any money anymore, and they'd get um insolvent.”
The response contains a useful starting point: unreliable train services can create problems. It also identifies a relevant transport business that could lose revenue if fewer people commute.
The two points differ in how directly they answer the question.
Who receives the positive benefit?
The positive point centers on “everyone” becoming less dependent on Deutsche Bahn. That describes a possible benefit for people who currently rely on trains.
The question asks about businesses. The answer needs to explain what changes for a company when its employees no longer depend on a delayed train service.
The listener can infer a connection: employees may arrive late, work may start late, and companies may lose productive time. But the speaker does not express that connection.
| Part of the argument | What the original establishes | What needs development |
|---|---|---|
| Positive effect | People would depend less on the train company. | Explain how employers benefit from fewer transport disruptions. |
| Positive example | The speaker refers to train delays in Germany. | Connect those delays to late employees or interrupted work. |
| Negative effect | Deutsche Bahn would lose revenue and could become insolvent. | Explain the loss of commuter ticket sales and avoid absolute predictions. |
How the improved answer develops the original idea
The MSS Improved Version preserves the railway example and adds the missing explanation:
“A severe decline in commuting would affect businesses in both positive and negative ways. One positive effect is that companies would no longer be dependent on the Deutsche Bahn, the German railway service. Currently, businesses suffer when employees are late due to the severe train delays frequently caused in Germany. If commuting disappeared, companies would see increased productivity because work wouldn't be interrupted by transportation issues. However, a major negative point is that the Deutsche Bahn itself would stop earning any money. Without commuters buying tickets, the national railway service would eventually become insolvent. This would lead to massive revenue losses and potential bankruptcy for the entire German transportation sector.”
The most useful improvement appears in the positive explanation:
“Currently, businesses suffer when employees are late due to the severe train delays frequently caused in Germany.”
This sentence identifies the connection between the transport problem and the workplace. The next sentence states the business outcome:
“Companies would see increased productivity because work wouldn't be interrupted by transportation issues.”
The speaker can keep the original idea about train delays. Developing it means explaining why those delays matter to employers.
A stronger explanation still needs proportionate claims
The improved answer makes the positive business connection clearer, but its negative prediction goes too far.
Fewer commuters could reduce ticket revenue. That does not establish that Deutsche Bahn would stop earning any money, nor that the entire German transportation sector would face bankruptcy.
The original example supports a narrower argument about lost commuter revenue and financial pressure on a railway business. Keeping the consequence proportionate makes the explanation more credible.
When developing an example, add the missing reasoning without expanding the claim beyond what the example supports.
Delivery leaves less room for explanation
The response contains 73 words at an average pace of 97 words per minute. The detailed Fluency feedback identifies a 2.7-second stop after “everyone” and a 1.1-second stop after “entirely.”
These pauses interrupt the positive point before the speaker finishes explaining it. Restarts such as “would wouldn't” and “would get ... wouldn't earn” also consume time without adding meaning.
The practical goal is to deliver a complete explanation more smoothly. Simpler wording can help the speaker reach the business consequence within the available time.
Average speaking pace and fluency provide different information. The pace summarizes how much speech fits into the response window. The pause evidence shows where delivery breaks down.
What the feedback tells us
| Area | Evidence | Practical lesson |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | The positive point does not explain a benefit to businesses. | Check who receives each benefit or suffers each loss. |
| Fluency | Long pauses and restarts interrupt the explanation. | Practice completing each thought in connected phrases. |
| Intelligibility | The feedback describes the speech as clear. | Preserve that clarity while improving continuity. |
| Language Use | “Depend dependent on” contains a restart, and “severely delays” needs “severe delays.” | Practice the complete phrases “dependent on” and “severe delays.” |
| Organization | The response has a positive–negative sequence, but the positive explanation stops before establishing its business consequence. | Develop each point through to its result. |
The response has identifiable strengths. The speaker chooses a concrete example, uses relevant vocabulary, and signals the shift between positive and negative effects. Those strengths give the answer something to build on.
A practical check for business-impact questions
Before finishing each point, ask:
- Which business am I discussing?
- What changes for that business?
- Why does that change help or hurt it?
For the positive point here, the improved answer identifies employers, fewer interruptions caused by transport problems, and increased productivity.
For the negative point, it identifies Deutsche Bahn, fewer commuter ticket purchases, and lost revenue.
That check helps the speaker complete the explanation while staying focused on the question.
Frequently asked questions
Why is coverage partial when the speaker gives a positive and a negative?
The question asks for effects on businesses. The negative point identifies a business consequence, but the positive point mainly describes people becoming less dependent on trains.
Does this answer need more advanced vocabulary?
The main missing element is an explanation of the positive business effect. The word “insolvent” is relevant, but vocabulary cannot supply that missing reasoning.
Does the speaker need a completely different example?
The train-delay example can work. The improved answer develops it by explaining how employee lateness and transport interruptions affect companies.
Is 97 words per minute the whole problem?
The pace is one part of the evidence. The response also contains specific pauses and restarts, and the positive business effect remains unexplained. Delivery and task fulfillment need separate attention.
How can I practice a more connected response?
Use Follow Along inside Improved Version on My Speaking Score. Adjust the playback speed and practice complete phrases, paying attention to how each explanation reaches its consequence.
Practice with your own speaking data
Get your free TOEFL Speaking assessment at www.myspeakingscore.com. Review your response, compare it with the Improved Version, and use the detailed feedback to choose your next practice target.