Duolingo English Test Interactive Writing: Answering the Follow-Up Question

This guide is about the Duolingo English Test, not the Duolingo language-learning app.

In Interactive Writing, you first have five minutes to respond to a prompt. You then receive a customized follow-up and have three minutes to expand on the same subject.

Imagine that your first response argues that universities should record all lectures. The follow-up asks you to consider a problem your first answer did not address.

A weak answer says:

"It depends. There are advantages and disadvantages. Maybe recordings are good, but maybe they are bad."

The writer has retreated from the first position. The follow-up needs a more useful move: accept a real limit, name its effect, and show what still holds.

That is the lexical decision. Do you need to concede a point, name a caveat, hedge certainty, limit a claim, or connect a concession to the conclusion that survives?

The follow-up is not a restart

Your second response should build on the first one. Duolingo's official description says the follow-up asks test takers to elaborate on a theme not addressed in the initial response. That does not mean you must reverse your view.

A useful logical shape is:

Original position → conceded limitation → precise condition → position that still holds

For example:

"I concede that recordings may reduce attendance in some classes. That said, universities should still provide them when illness, disability, or time-zone differences prevent students from attending live."

The writer accepts one point and keeps a narrower version of the original claim.

1. Concede vs. agree: accept an opposing point

Concede means accept that a disputed point, criticism, or limitation is valid, often while keeping a broader position.

"I concede that unrestricted access could discourage some students from attending in person."

Agree is broader and does not imply movement from opposition. If two people already share a view, they agree. If you accept weight from the other side of an argument, concede may fit.

The main pattern is concede that + clause. Do not use concede to before a fact. Concede to belongs mainly to yielding to a person, pressure, or demand.

Compare acknowledge. You can acknowledge that a concern exists without accepting that it is valid. Conceding gives the point more weight. Use that stronger verb only when you genuinely accept the limitation.

2. Caveat vs. hedge: one limit or general uncertainty?

A caveat is a specific, nameable limitation attached to an otherwise useful claim.

"The policy is workable, with one caveat: students need an offline option."

The caveat tells the reader where to limit trust. It is not any possible problem and not a fatal flaw. If the policy violates the law, that is not a small caveat; it is a blocker.

A hedge is the broader strategy of reducing the certainty or strength of wording.

"The policy could improve access for students who miss class."

Could hedges the causal claim. It does not name a condition. A sentence can contain both:

"The policy could improve access, with the caveat that students without stable internet may still be excluded."

Use the natural noun frames with one caveat, with the caveat that, or the main caveat is that. Avoid there is caveat and make a caveat. In formal writing, the noun is safer than the business-jargon verb to caveat.

3. To some extent: partly true, not wholly true

To some extent limits a claim by saying it is partly, but not fully, true or applicable.

"The concern is valid to some extent, because recorded lectures may reduce attendance in large introductory classes."

This phrase needs a claim that can sensibly be partial. It is not a substitute for evidence, and it should not appear in every sentence.

Up to a point often does similar work and may foreground a boundary before a counterpoint. The two expressions overlap, so do not force a false distinction. In a short academic response, to some extent is a clear neutral choice.

Avoid letting the phrase empty your position:

"To some extent, recordings may perhaps sometimes be useful."

That sentence piles hedges together. Choose the degree you mean and then make the claim.

4. That said: qualify without retracting

That said signals that the next point qualifies, weakens, or contrasts with what came before without retracting it.

"Recordings cannot reproduce every classroom discussion. That said, they give absent students access to the main explanation."

The first point remains true. The second balances it.

However can also mark contrast and often fits the same position. That said is useful because its logic is explicit: I accept what I just said, and here is the counterbalancing point.

Do not use it when the next sentence merely repeats the first or gives a direct result.

"Recordings help absent students. That said, they improve access."

There is no real qualification there. Therefore or a simple continuation would fit the logic better.

5. Nonetheless: what holds despite the problem

Nonetheless concedes the previous point and then states what remains true in spite of it.

"Some students may rely too heavily on recordings; nonetheless, the access benefit justifies offering them."

It is a formal adverb. When it alone connects two independent clauses, use a semicolon or a full stop, not a comma splice:

"Attendance may fall. Nonetheless, the policy can still be justified."
"Attendance may fall; nonetheless, the policy can still be justified."

Nevertheless is a full synonym. Still is often lighter and more conversational. Do not invent a rigid meaning difference among them.

The key distinction is logical. Nonetheless expresses concession, not cause. If the second point happens because of the first, use therefore or as a result.

One follow-up, six useful moves

Suppose your first response says that group projects should be part of every degree. The follow-up asks: What difficulty might this policy create for students?

Each phrase answers a different need:

Concede: "I concede that group projects can make individual effort hard to assess."

Caveat: "I support the policy, with one caveat: part of the grade should reflect individual work."

Hedge: "A shared grade may not fully reflect each student's contribution."

To some extent: "This concern can be addressed to some extent through peer evaluation."

That said: "Peer ratings can also be biased. That said, they provide evidence that a single group mark misses."

Nonetheless: "No method measures contribution perfectly; nonetheless, mixed individual and group grading is fairer than one shared mark."

You would not normally use all six in three minutes. The point is to choose the move your logic needs.

Weaker and more precise: the same follow-up

Original position: universities should require a practical internship before graduation.

Follow-up: How might this requirement disadvantage some students?

Weaker version:

"It depends because internships are good but also bad. Some students may have problems, so perhaps universities should not require them."

More precise version:

"I concede that an internship requirement can disadvantage students who already work or care for family members. The policy is defensible, with one caveat: universities must offer paid, part-time, or campus-based options. These alternatives may not remove every burden; nonetheless, they preserve the practical benefit without forcing all students into the same schedule."

The rewrite expands the original answer instead of abandoning it:

• Concede accepts a valid criticism.
• Caveat names the condition attached to continued support.
• May not hedges an absolute claim.
• Nonetheless states what still holds despite the remaining burden.

A compact response pattern

When the follow-up introduces a missing problem, try this four-sentence pattern:

1. Accept: I concede that X.
2. Explain: Give one concrete reason or example.
3. Set a condition: The proposal remains sound, with one caveat: Y.
4. Return: Nonetheless, Z still holds because...

Use this as a logic check, not a memorized script. If the follow-up asks for an example rather than a limitation, answer the question directly. Do not force concession language where no concession exists.

Common mistakes

• Retreating to it depends. Name what the claim depends on.
• Conceding without keeping or revising a position. A concession should lead somewhere.
• Using concede for simple recognition. It can sound debate-like when no point was disputed.
• Calling every problem a caveat. A caveat scopes an otherwise valid claim; a fatal flaw overturns it.
• Stacking hedges. May perhaps possibly makes the claim hard to find.
• Using that said without contrast. The next point must qualify or counterbalance the first.
• Joining clauses with a comma before nonetheless. Use a full stop or semicolon, unless a coordinator such as but is present.
• Contradicting the concession. If you concede that a problem is real, do not immediately claim it does not exist.

Quick check

1. You accept that an opposing criticism is valid but keep your broader argument. Which verb fits?

A. concede
B. mention
C. proliferate

2. You want to name one exact condition on an otherwise firm recommendation. Which noun fits?

A. hedge
B. caveat
C. retreat

3. Which sentence has correct concession logic and punctuation?

A. "The sample is small, nonetheless the pattern is useful."
B. "The sample is small; nonetheless, the pattern is useful."
C. "The sample is small; therefore, the pattern is useful despite that fact."

Answers: 1-A, 2-B, 3-B. Concede accepts the point, a caveat names the exact limitation, and nonetheless works as an adverb after a semicolon.

Practice prompt

First response: Universities should allow students to use AI tools for brainstorming.

Follow-up: What risk might this create, and how should universities respond?

Write for three minutes. Concede one real risk, state one clear caveat or condition, and finish with what still holds. Use only one of that said or nonetheless.

If you want to practice choosing between concession, caveat, and hedging in fresh prompts, try Lyra Practice.

This independent guide is about the Duolingo English Test and is not affiliated with Duolingo. Continue at the Duolingo English Test Vocabulary Practice hub or explore the Exam English hub.

Sources

• How does the DET measure real-world academic writing? — Duolingo English Test
• New research on the Interactive Writing task — Duolingo English Test
• How does the DET measure writing? — Duolingo English Test

Related

• Hedge vs Caveat: What's the Difference?
• Hedge vs Qualify: What's the Difference?
• Caveat vs Exception: What's the Difference?
• Duolingo English Test Vocabulary Practice
• Exam English Vocabulary Practice