Jobins Training · Free OET Practice
OET Reading: practise the reason behind every answer.
Build accuracy with four lessons, 26 original questions and explanations that show both the evidence and the traps.
No registrationAnswers explainedOriginal practice- Starting check: read the exact condition
- Part A skill: choose the right text
- Part B skill: purpose, action and exceptions
- Part C skill: follow a writer’s argument
Write answers on paper before revealing the explanations. Suggested times are learning targets, not official section timings.
R01 · Starting check · 6 questions
Read the condition, not just the keyword
Goal: distinguish a deadline, a condition and an exception. Allow about six minutes. This is a short-answer skills check, not the format of an official Part B paper.
First identify what the question asks: who, when, where or under what condition. Locate that detail, then read the whole sentence and its neighbour. A repeated word alone does not establish the answer.
Text 1 · Staff communication sessions
Staff joining the communication project must attend a briefing before observing a session. The coordinator offers briefings on Tuesday and Thursday. Observers may choose either day, but their manager must approve the release from duty. A place on a briefing does not automatically reserve an observation slot; these are allocated separately after attendance has been recorded.
- What must staff attend before observing a session?
- Who must approve their release from duty?
- Does booking a briefing also secure an observation slot?
Text 2 · Patient feedback forms
Paper feedback forms collected by 3 pm on Friday will be included in the current weekly review. Forms received later will be reviewed the following week. Patients may leave the name field blank. However, anyone requesting a personal reply should give a telephone number or email address in the contact box. Forms asking for a reply are still included in the weekly review.
- What is the deadline for inclusion in the current weekly review?
- What must someone requesting a personal reply provide?
- Are forms requesting a reply excluded from the weekly review?
Reveal R01 answers and evidence
- A briefing. The first sentence places it before observation. Booking alone is not attendance.
- Their manager. The coordinator offers the sessions; the manager approves release. These are different responsibilities.
- No. Observation slots are allocated separately after attendance is recorded. Do not turn one booking into two.
- 3 pm on Friday. Both the time and day matter. Friday alone is incomplete.
- A telephone number or email address. Either is sufficient; the notice does not require both or a name.
- No. The final sentence explicitly includes them. A reply request changes the contact requirement, not eligibility for review.
Use your result: if you missed 3 or 6, reread limiting phrases. If you missed 2, distinguish job roles. If you missed 4 or 5, practise giving the complete detail requested. Six answers cannot predict an OET score.
Fresh retry: apply the same habit
New notice: Staff may join a practice group after completing the induction. The administrator records attendance; a supervisor approves changes to duty hours.
Try before opening the next explanation: who approves a change to duty hours?
Check the retry
A supervisor. The administrator records attendance. Assign each action to its named person.
Next: Choose the right text →
R02 · Part A skill · 6 questions
Choose the right text before hunting for a detail
Goal: build a map of four texts before searching for details. In Part A, knowing where to look saves repeated reading. Here, allow about five minutes for six matching questions. This mini-set is shorter than the official 20-question Part A.
Read headings and opening lines first. Give each text a two- or three-word label. Then look for the function of the information: eligibility, preparation, location or feedback. The same word may appear in several texts.
Text A · Who the review is for
The nurse-led home-equipment review is for adults already using equipment issued by the community service. The review checks whether the current equipment still meets the person’s reported needs. Requests for first-time equipment assessment go to the initial assessment team instead. Relatives may help someone request a review, with that person’s agreement.
Text B · Before the appointment
Bring the equipment list supplied at your previous appointment and note any difficulty you have noticed when using the items. Do not bring large equipment to the clinic. If your list is missing, contact the service administrator, who can arrange a replacement. Tell the booking team in advance if you need an interpreter.
Text C · Arrival and access
Reviews take place in the ground-floor community suite, beside the east entrance. A step-free route connects this entrance to the waiting area. Please report to the suite’s desk rather than the main hospital reception. If transport is delayed, call the booking team; they will discuss whether the appointment can still go ahead that day.
Text D · After the review
A written summary will be sent within five working days. If the review identifies a need for assessment by another professional, the summary will explain the proposed next step; it does not itself confirm an appointment. Comments about the review service can be sent to the experience team using the form enclosed with the summary.
For each question, write A, B, C or D. A text may be used more than once.
- Which text explains where to report on arrival?
- Which text says what a written summary does not guarantee?
- Which text explains who should use a different assessment service?
- Which text tells patients what to do if a document is missing?
- Which text gives a way to comment on the service?
- Which text says when to mention an interpreter requirement?
Reveal R02 answers and the search route
- C. It directs patients to the suite’s desk. B concerns preparation, not check-in.
- D. A proposed next step is not a confirmed appointment. The word “summary” points here, but the negative statement supplies the answer.
- A. People needing their first equipment assessment use the initial assessment team. Existing equipment users are the intended review group.
- B. A missing equipment list can be replaced through the administrator. D describes a different document issued later.
- D. The enclosed form goes to the experience team. C’s telephone call is for transport delay, not feedback.
- B. The booking team needs this information in advance. C mentions the same team for another purpose.
Your text map: A eligibility; B preparation; C arrival; D follow-up. Notice how “booking team” appears twice. Meaning selects the answer; the repeated phrase does not.
Check the transfer task
C contains the step-free access route; D gives five working days. Keep navigation separate from copying the requested detail accurately.
R03 · Part B skill · 6 questions
Find the action, purpose or exception
Goal: identify the message’s purpose or required action without widening its meaning. Read each extract and choose A, B or C. Allow around nine minutes, then review every alternative.
Extract 1 · Handover pilot
For the next fortnight, the evening handover will begin with a two-minute summary of unresolved actions. This will replace the current opening round of general announcements. Routine announcements should be placed on the staff noticeboard. The rest of the handover format will remain unchanged.
1. What is the notice mainly doing?
Extract 2 · Shared room bookings
Room 4 can be booked for small-group teaching. A booking is provisional until the education team confirms it by email. If no confirmation has arrived by the afternoon before the session, contact the team before inviting attendees to the room.
2. Staff who have not received confirmation should
Extract 3 · Translation requests
Use the request form for written patient information that needs translation. State the intended readers and the date the information will be needed. Urgent spoken communication should be arranged through the interpreting service; the written translation queue is not designed for this purpose.
3. What distinction does the message emphasise?
Extract 4 · Borrowed display materials
Teams borrowing teaching display packs should return all reusable items by Monday. Used paper response sheets should be kept by the teaching team for its review and should not be returned with the pack. Check the item list inside the lid before handing the pack back.
4. Which item should remain with the borrowing team?
Extract 5 · Patient experience interviews
Interviewers should invite patients to describe what happened before asking about possible improvements. Avoid suggesting an explanation for a difficulty until the patient has given their own account. The aim is to reduce the chance of our assumptions shaping the feedback.
5. Why should interviewers wait before suggesting explanations?
Extract 6 · Digital guide update
The revised staff orientation guide will be released on Wednesday. Until then, continue to use version 3. After release, links on the intranet will point to version 4, but saved local copies will not change automatically. Staff using downloaded copies should replace them after the release.
6. What must users of downloaded copies do?
Reveal R03 answers and all distractors
- A. The opening is changing; the remaining format stays the same. B incorrectly replaces the whole event. C treats a replacement as an addition; no longer total duration is stated.
- B. The instruction is to contact the team before inviting attendees there. A invents a calendar-based confirmation rule. C adds cancellation, which the extract does not require.
- C. The two communication needs have different routes. A confuses an unsuitable queue with no support. B makes an unsupported claim about what interpreting requests require.
- A. The response sheets are the explicit exception. B ignores the distinction between checking a list and retaining every listed item. C reverses the instruction to return reusable items.
- B. The stated aim concerns influence on the account. A introduces duration, which is not mentioned. C reverses the sequence: improvements are discussed, but after the experience is described.
- C. Local copies require replacement after release. A ignores the instruction to keep using version 3 meanwhile. B confuses an updated link with a changed downloaded file.
Common trap: an option may be sensible workplace advice yet still be unsupported by this particular text.
Fresh retry: a notice says, “The new form replaces the old cover sheet; the documents behind it are unchanged.” In one sentence, explain what changes and what stays the same.
Compare your retry
Only the cover sheet is replaced; the supporting documents stay unchanged. This is a limited change, not a replacement of the entire pack.
R04 · Part C skill · 8 questions
Follow the argument, not the strongest-sounding claim
Goal: follow a writer’s position and recognise qualified conclusions. Allow about 15 minutes for this single-text exercise. Official Part C contains two texts with eight questions each; this lesson provides one original practice text.
After each paragraph, note its job: introduce a problem, challenge an assumption, report a finding or qualify a conclusion. For inference questions, choose what the text supports without turning “may” into “will” or “some” into “all”.
Practice article · When a clear-looking letter still confuses
1. When a community clinic redesigned its appointment letters, the first discussions centred on appearance: a larger heading, a brighter logo and more white space. These changes made the page less crowded, but several patients still arrived unsure which building to enter. The difficulty was not that the address was absent. It was that two addresses appeared, with little indication of which one mattered for the visit. The redesign team began to see clarity as a question of decisions: what does the reader need to do, and what on the page helps them do it?
2. Staff initially expected the shortest version of the letter to work best. Yet shortening created its own problems. One draft removed the sentence explaining that the appointment took place in the community annex rather than the main hospital. Another replaced a description of what to bring with a brief label that some readers did not recognise. The team did not abandon concise writing. Instead, it distinguished information that competed with the main action from information that made the action possible. A useful sentence could justify its space by preventing a predictable misunderstanding.
3. A small patient group was then asked to use draft letters to describe how they would prepare for and travel to an appointment. This was more revealing than asking whether the wording was clear. Most participants had initially said that they understood the letter, but some chose the wrong entrance when explaining their journey. The team learned to look for demonstrated understanding rather than polite agreement. However, the exercise was not a reading examination: when someone struggled, the object under scrutiny was the letter, not the patient’s intelligence or effort.
4. The group did not represent every person attending the clinic. It included few people who used translated information and no one who relied on a screen reader. The team therefore treated the results as useful clues, not a certificate of universal accessibility. Further testing with other readers was planned. This caution mattered because a change that helps one reader may create a barrier for another. A location shown only in a coloured box, for example, could be missed when a letter is reproduced without colour or read through assistive software.
5. After the revised letter was introduced, reception staff reported fewer calls asking which entrance to use. It was tempting to attribute the change entirely to the wording. But signs outside the clinic had been improved during the same month, and the mix of appointments was different from the previous period. The fall in calls was encouraging without establishing which change caused it. The team kept a record of the types of questions still being asked, so that the next revision could address remaining confusion instead of treating one favourable indicator as the end of the work.
6. Some staff worried that involving readers at several stages would make routine updates too slow. That concern deserved a practical response. The team proposed testing major changes with a small range of readers, while checking minor factual updates against an agreed checklist. It also suggested reusing phrases that had worked well, provided their meaning still fitted the new context. A familiar sentence was a starting point, not a protected formula. When the service changed, the language might need to change with it, even if the previous version had once tested well.
7. The wider lesson was neither that design is unimportant nor that every letter requires an elaborate research project. It was that clarity should be judged by what readers can understand and do. Attractive presentation, concise language and operational experience all contribute, but none removes the need to examine assumptions. A letter can be grammatically correct and visually polished while still directing someone poorly. Asking readers to explain their next action offers a modest but valuable check, especially when teams remain willing to revise the message after publication.
1. In paragraph 1, the team comes to understand that clarity depends on
2. Paragraph 2 suggests that a sentence is worth retaining when it
3. Why was asking participants to describe their preparations useful?
4. The phrase “a certificate of universal accessibility” in paragraph 4 refers to
5. What does paragraph 5 imply about the reduction in calls?
6. The proposed approach in paragraph 6 aims to
7. How does the writer view previously successful wording?
8. Which statement best captures the writer’s overall position?
Reveal R04 answers, evidence and all distractors
- B. Paragraph 1 shifts attention to what readers need to do. A is too absolute: addresses need distinction, not a rule allowing only one. C repeats an early design idea rather than the new understanding. D contradicts the balanced approach.
- C. A useful sentence can prevent a predictable misunderstanding. A and D are not the stated reasons. B is undermined by the unfamiliar brief label; staff familiarity does not ensure patient understanding.
- A. Participants said they understood, yet some chose the wrong entrance. B conflicts with the focus on the letter. C contradicts the travel task. D reverses the finding.
- D. The phrase figuratively describes a conclusion the limited group cannot justify. A and B invent a legal document or award. C is much narrower than “universal” and is not what the phrase means.
- B. The wording, signs and appointment mix changed together. Their separate effects were not established. A, C and D each assert a causal certainty the paragraph does not support.
- C. Major changes receive reader testing; minor factual changes use a checklist. A ignores this distinction. B mistakes responding to a concern for silencing it. D ignores the need to fit the new context.
- A. Paragraph 6 permits reuse while requiring contextual fit. B excludes a permitted practice. C changes past success into a guarantee. D contradicts the explicit rejection of a protected formula.
- D. Paragraph 7 places understanding, action and willingness to revise at the centre. A repeats the assumption challenged in paragraph 2. B is rejected by the modest practical check. C is undermined by the polished but confusing letter.
Compare the retry
“…the wording alone caused the reduction.” Two changes occurred together. The passage supports caution about attribution, not a conclusion that either change was ineffective.