DELF B2 speaking topics: 20 examples and a model answer

DELF B2 speaking topics are almost always about social issues: work, school, digital life, the environment. On exam day you receive a short prompt document and have 30 minutes to prepare a talk, followed by a debate with the examiner. This guide gives you 20 topics sorted by theme, one topic worked through from start to finish, and a method for using your preparation time well.

For the full test procedure and the marking grid, start with our guide to DELF B2 speaking. The test is in French, so the model answer below is in French, with the commentary in English.

What a speaking topic looks like

The topic is a prompt document a few lines long, often a press extract. It presents a fact or a debate, sometimes with two opposing opinions. It does not always ask a question: it is up to you to identify the issue, the underlying question the document raises.

In most centres you draw two topics and choose one. The test then has two parts:

The mark out of 25 rests on five criteria: the monologue, the interaction, vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. So the best of the DELF B2 speaking topics you draw is not the one you find most interesting, but the one you have the most concrete examples for.

20 DELF B2 speaking topics by theme

Here are twenty practice topics built on the exam model. For each, we give what the document presents and the question to discuss. Practise stating your position in one sentence, then finding two arguments and one example for each.

These themes come back session after session. For each one, prepare three or four specific examples in advance: a fact from your country, a personal experience, an approximate figure. That is what makes a talk convincing. Learn the key French vocabulary for each theme too, since you will need it in both the talk and the debate.

One topic worked through from start to finish

Let's take the social media topic. Here is the prompt document as you might receive it.

Réseaux sociaux : faut-il attendre 15 ans ?

Plusieurs pays envisagent d'interdire l'inscription sur les réseaux sociaux avant 15 ans. Les partisans de cette mesure rappellent que les adolescents y passent souvent plus de trois heures par jour, au détriment du sommeil et des devoirs, et qu'ils y sont exposés au harcèlement. Leurs opposants jugent l'interdiction impossible à contrôler : il suffit de mentir sur son âge. Ils estiment qu'il vaudrait mieux apprendre aux jeunes à utiliser ces outils qu'à les leur cacher. Entre protection et liberté, le débat divise parents, enseignants et responsables politiques.

In short: several countries are considering banning social media sign-ups under 15. Supporters point to lost sleep, homework and online bullying; opponents say a ban is impossible to enforce and that teaching young people would be better.

Preparation: the issue and the plan

The document sets two positions against each other: protecting young people with a ban, or educating them. The issue can be: "Is a ban the best way to protect young people on social media?" A simple three-part plan is enough:

1. The risks are real (sleep, concentration, bullying): a personal example.
2. A ban alone has limits (easy to get round, discovery without preparation).
3. Proposal: an enforced age limit plus digital education from secondary school.

On your notes, write only these keywords, your introduction and your conclusion. The rest must be spoken, not read.

The monologue (about 5 minutes)

Le document que j'ai choisi aborde une question qui touche presque toutes les familles : faut-il interdire les réseaux sociaux aux jeunes de moins de 15 ans ? Certains pays l'envisagent pour protéger les adolescents, tandis que d'autres jugent cette mesure inefficace. On peut donc se demander si l'interdiction est la meilleure façon de protéger les jeunes. Pour ma part, je pense qu'une limite d'âge est utile, mais qu'elle ne suffit pas sans éducation. J'aborderai d'abord les risques, puis les limites d'une interdiction, avant de proposer une solution.

Tout d'abord, les risques sont bien réels. Un adolescent qui passe trois heures par jour sur son téléphone dort moins et se concentre moins en classe. Prenons le cas de mon cousin : en quatrième, ses notes ont nettement baissé l'année où il a ouvert un compte, et ses parents ne s'en sont rendu compte que tard. De plus, le harcèlement en ligne suit l'élève jusque chez lui, le soir et le week-end.

Cependant, une interdiction seule a ses limites. Comme le souligne le document, il suffit de mentir sur sa date de naissance. Et à 15 ans, le jeune découvrirait ces outils sans aucune préparation, ce qui n'est pas forcément plus sûr.

C'est pourquoi je défends une solution en deux temps : une limite d'âge, contrôlée par les plateformes, et des cours d'éducation au numérique dès le collège, pour apprendre à repérer une fausse information ou à réagir face au harcèlement.

En définitive, protéger les jeunes ne veut pas dire les tenir à l'écart du monde numérique, mais les y préparer. Voilà pourquoi je suis favorable à une limite d'âge, à condition qu'elle s'accompagne d'une véritable éducation.

Notice the structure: presenting the document, the issue, the position, the announced plan, three parts with clear linking words, then a conclusion restating the position. That is what the first criterion of the grid, the monologue, checks.

The debate: the examiner's questions

The examiner will then challenge your position to see whether you can defend it and add nuance. Here are typical questions, with answer ideas you would give in French.

• "Aren't parents the only ones responsible?" Agree that parents play a key role, then add that not all of them have the technical knowledge to control a phone, so schools can help.
• "What is the point of a ban nobody can enforce?" Concede that it will be bypassed, then argue that a rule also sets a norm: alcohol laws are not always respected, yet no one suggests scrapping them.
• "Doesn't social media have advantages too?" Yes: it keeps people in touch and informed. That is exactly why you are not proposing a lifelong ban, but learning to use it.
• "What do people think in your country?" Answer with a concrete example from your country: an easy question that lets you show your vocabulary.

During the debate, do not repeat your monologue. Listen to the whole objection, rephrase it, concede what is fair, then defend your idea with a new example. Our 60 useful speaking phrases give you the French expressions for each of these steps.

Preparing in 30 minutes: a minute-by-minute plan

Mistakes that cost points

1. Summarising the document instead of discussing it. One sentence of presentation is enough; the examiner wants your opinion.
2. Reading your notes. The talk must sound natural: look at the examiners.
3. Speaking for less than five minutes. A short talk does not leave room to develop your arguments.
4. Changing your mind at the first objection. Adding nuance, yes; abandoning your position, no.
5. Staying abstract. Without concrete examples, an argument does not convince.

Where to find more DELF B2 speaking topics

• The official samples from France Éducation international, to see the exact format of the prompt document.
• Our DELF B2 sample papers: six complete tests, each with a speaking paper.
• Our speaking studio, to record yourself with a timer and listen back.

The best practice is to work through two DELF B2 speaking topics a week out loud, with a timer, recording yourself. Our 8-week study plan builds in that rhythm.

In short

DELF B2 speaking topics look alike from one session to the next: a short document, a social question, a point of view to defend. What makes the difference is method: a clear issue, an announced plan, concrete examples and a debate where you add nuance without giving in. Practise the twenty topics in this guide out loud and in real time: on exam day, no theme will catch you off guard.