How much time per question in each TOEFL iBT section

The TOEFL iBT (Test of English as a Foreign Language, internet-based test) is a four-section academic English assessment used by universities and visa-issuing bodies worldwide. Each section imposes a strict cumulative time limit, and candidates who misallocate their minutes frequently sacrifice marks even when their underlying language competence is strong. Mastering TOEFL pacing strategy is therefore not a supplementary skill; it is a core component of exam readiness that directly influences the score achievable from any given level of proficiency.

This article provides a comprehensive, section-by-section analysis of time budgets, monitoring techniques, and strategic adjustments that candidates can implement during preparation and on test day. The framework applies to the standard four-section TOEFL iBT format: Reading, Listening, Speaking, Writing.

Understanding the TOEFL iBT structure and scoring relationship

The TOEFL iBT comprises four timed sections administered in a fixed order. Each section contributes equally to the overall score, which ranges from 0 to 120, with individual section scores on a 0–30 scale. Because the sections are independent, a candidate who excels in Reading but runs short on Writing time cannot transfer minutes from one section to the other. This rigidity makes section-level time management a first-order concern.

The exam is adaptive in two senses. First, within the Reading section, item difficulty adjusts based on performance on earlier items, influencing the overall difficulty profile of the passage set. Second, the Speaking and Writing sections include integrated tasks that combine receptive and productive skills, meaning that a slow reader will find the corresponding integrated Writing task proportionally more pressured. Effective pacing therefore compounds across sections.

Understanding how section scores aggregate also matters for prioritisation. Because each section contributes one-quarter of the total score, candidates should resist over-investing time in any single section at the expense of the others. A pacing strategy that protects all four sections simultaneously will generally outperform one that pursues excellence in two while compromising the remaining pair.

Reading: 35 minutes for 20 questions (2 passages)
Listening: 36 minutes for 28 questions (4–6 audio clips)
Speaking: 16 minutes for 4 tasks
Writing: 29 minutes for 2 tasks (1 Integrated, 1 Independent)

The foundational principles of TOEFL pacing

Effective pacing rests on three principles: pre-calibrated time budgets, active time monitoring, and pre-planned strategic trade-offs. Each principle must be applied at the preparation stage so that it becomes an automated response on test day rather than a reactive decision under pressure.

The first principle is pre-calibration. Before the exam, candidates should establish a precise minute-per-question budget for each section and verify that this budget is achievable under timed conditions during practice tests. Budgets that look reasonable on paper but prove impossible to maintain in practice are not useful. Pre-calibration transforms abstract time limits into embodied habits.

The second principle is active monitoring. Passive awareness of elapsed time is insufficient; candidates should develop the habit of checking the clock at defined checkpoints—for example, after every two Reading questions, or after each Listening conversation—and comparing actual progress against the target pace. Variance from the target should trigger immediate acceleration, not gradual catch-up.

The third principle is pre-planned trade-offs. Every section contains items that demand disproportionate time relative to their mark value. Identifying these traps in advance and committing to a maximum time investment per item prevents the gradual time erosion that leads to rushed work at the end of a section.

Reading section pacing: strategies for 20 questions in 35 minutes

The Reading section presents two academic passages of approximately 700 words each, followed by ten questions per passage. With 35 minutes available, the theoretical average is 1 minute 45 seconds per question. However, the distribution of question types means that a flat allocation does not serve candidates well.

Factual information and negative factual information questions are typically retrievable with direct reference to the passage and should be answered in 30–45 seconds. Inference questions require a short reasoning step from stated information and generally require 45–60 seconds. Vocabulary-in-context items can be resolved in under 30 seconds if the candidate reads the surrounding sentence carefully. Rhetorical purpose and sentence insertion questions demand more processing time—up to 60–90 seconds—because they require an understanding of discourse structure rather than a single data point.

A practical strategy is to allocate approximately 8 minutes per passage (including reading time) and 30–45 seconds per question, with the final two questions of each passage—typically those requiring synthesis or evaluation—receiving up to 90 seconds if time permits. If a candidate reaches the final question with fewer than three minutes remaining, the recommended approach is to read the question stem and each answer choice carefully, eliminate the two least probable options, and select from the remaining two rather than leaving the item unanswered.

Passage reading itself should be purposeful. Reading the entire passage before touching any questions generally produces better outcomes than an approach that interleaves reading and answering, because it avoids the disorientation of returning repeatedly to the passage and re-establishing context. Allocate approximately 3 minutes for initial passage reading, noting structural markers such as paragraph function, argument progression, and the author's stance. The remaining 5 minutes is then distributed across the ten questions with a clearer mental map of where relevant information is located.

Listening section pacing: tracking audio and managing note-dependent questions

The Listening section requires sustained attention to four to six audio clips—lectures and conversations—that are played only once. Candidates cannot revisit material, making active listening and structured note-taking essential. The section provides 36 minutes, which yields an average of approximately 1 minute 17 seconds per question, but the effective allocation must also account for the duration of the audio clips themselves.

Conversation clips last approximately 2–3 minutes and generate five questions each. A practical budget is 30–40 seconds per conversation question. Lecture clips are longer—3–5 minutes—and typically yield six questions, with inference, attitude, and purpose questions requiring more processing than factual content questions. For lecture items, 45–60 seconds per question is more realistic.

The primary pacing risk in Listening is that slow note-taking during the audio reduces the time available for answering questions. Candidates who attempt to capture every word will frequently fall behind and miss the beginning of subsequent clips. The solution is a structured shorthand system: identify key transitions (professor's viewpoint, student's counter-argument, evidence presented), assign abbreviations, and practise until the system is fluent. Effective notes reduce answering time to near-baseline levels, protecting the per-question budget.

For questions that ask about material not directly stated—meaning questions, speaker attitude, or implied next steps—the candidate must synthesise across their notes. If a candidate reaches the section end with time pressure, the recommended approach is to review notes immediately after each clip while memory is fresh, answer all questions for that clip before the next audio begins, and avoid deferring items across clips.

Speaking section pacing: 16 minutes across four task types

The Speaking section presents four tasks with a combined administration time of approximately 16 minutes, including 1–2 minutes of set-up time. The effective speaking time—during which the candidate is actively producing speech—is approximately 13–14 minutes. The section tests three integrated tasks and one independent task.

Task 1 (Independent Speaking) provides 15 seconds of preparation time followed by 45 seconds of response. The key pacing challenge is converting a structured response into spoken output within this window. A recommended framework is: state the preference or position in the first 5 seconds, provide the primary reason in the next 15 seconds, a specific example or detail in the following 15 seconds, and use the remaining 10 seconds for a concise conclusion. Candidates who spend more than 8–10 seconds on the preparation note will find themselves compressing their response awkwardly. Pre-building two or three reusable example categories during preparation (personal experience, observation, hypothetical) eliminates the cognitive load of generating content during the 15-second preparation window.

Task 2 (Integrated Reading-Listening-Speaking) provides 45 seconds to read a short passage, then 30 seconds of preparation before a 60-second response. The passage summarises a campus situation and presents two possible courses of action or opinions. Candidates must summarise the reading, explain the speaker's position, and evaluate the speaker's reasoning. The budget should allocate approximately 25 seconds to reading, 5–10 seconds for initial note organisation, and the remaining 40 seconds for the response, which should contain one sentence about the reading, two to three sentences about the speaker's position, and two sentences evaluating the speaker's argument.

Task 3 (Integrated Listening-Speaking) involves a lecture excerpt of approximately 60–90 seconds. The candidate reads a brief academic concept and then hears a professor expand on it with examples. The 30-second preparation period must suffice for synthesising both the reading and the listening. Effective candidates typically spend 10 seconds noting the academic concept, 15 seconds capturing the professor's examples and relationship to the concept, and 5 seconds planning the response arc. The 60-second response should define the concept, present the professor's examples, and connect the examples to the concept.

Task 4 (Integrated Listening-Speaking Academic) presents a 60–90 second academic lecture with no accompanying text. The 20-second preparation period is the most constrained of all Speaking tasks. Effective preparation involves identifying the lecture's topic sentence within the first 10 seconds, capturing two supporting points and their associated evidence during the remaining 10 seconds, and delivering a response that opens with the topic, presents the two points with evidence, and closes within the 60-second window.

The most common pacing failure in Speaking is overrun—continuing to speak after the response time ends, which is penalised by the scoring system. Practising with a visible countdown timer during preparation builds the internal sense of when to close a response gracefully. A useful heuristic is to conclude one sentence before the timer shows 5 seconds remaining, allowing a final declarative sentence to land cleanly.

Writing section pacing: 29 minutes across Integrated and Independent tasks

The Writing section comprises two tasks completed within 29 minutes. The first is an Integrated task that requires reading a passage, listening to a clip, and writing a summary that synthesises both sources. The second is an Independent task requiring a sustained argumentative essay. Effective pacing across both tasks demands advance organisation of template structures and pre-written transition phrases.

The Integrated Writing task should be completed in 18–20 minutes. This budget should be distributed as follows: 3 minutes to read the passage (during which the candidate should note the main argument and supporting points), 1 minute to preview the listening task prompt, then approximately 3–4 minutes to listen actively and take structured notes in two columns (reading points versus listening points). The writing phase should require 10–12 minutes: an opening paragraph stating the reading's argument and the lecturer's response, followed by two body paragraphs each covering one point from the lecture and its relationship to the reading. The recommended structure is: introduction (2 sentences), body paragraph 1 (4–5 sentences), body paragraph 2 (4–5 sentences), optional brief conclusion. Candidates who draft full sentences during the reading and listening phases will find the writing phase significantly faster.

The Independent Writing task should be completed in 20–22 minutes. The essay requires a clear thesis statement, two or three body paragraphs with specific examples, and a conclusion. A proven template is: introduction (3–4 sentences: context, position, preview of two or three supporting points), body paragraph 1 (5–6 sentences: topic sentence, explanation, example, connection to thesis), body paragraph 2 (5–6 sentences: same structure), optional body paragraph 3 if the candidate has a third strong supporting point, and a conclusion (3–4 sentences: restate thesis, summarise points, close with a broader implication). Candidates who plan their essay outline in 2–3 minutes before writing will produce more coherent essays in less time than those who write without structure, because planning eliminates the cognitive effort of deciding what to argue while simultaneously composing.

Editing time should be built into both tasks. Allocating 2–3 minutes per task for reviewing and correcting obvious errors (subject-verb agreement, article usage, sentence fragments) adds negligible time but protects against the impression of careless work that can affect scoring. Candidates should read the final essay aloud if time permits—a silent read often misses errors that are audible.

Common pacing pitfalls and how to avoid them

Across all four TOEFL iBT sections, certain pacing errors recur consistently among candidates who do not prepare strategically. Identifying these traps before they manifest during the exam is one of the highest-value preparation activities available.

The most prevalent pitfall is over-investing time in early items. Because early questions in each section are sometimes framed in ways that invite extended analysis, candidates who pause to consider every possible interpretation frequently find themselves short on time for the final quarter of a section. The solution is a firm per-item time ceiling: once the ceiling is reached, select the best available option and move on. In most sections, every question carries the same weight, so time spent over-analysing an early question is time stolen from a later question of equal value.

A second common pitfall is passive reading without active engagement in the Reading section. Candidates who read without purpose often need to re-read passages multiple times, consuming time that cannot be recovered. Active reading—identifying the author's purpose, noting the function of each paragraph, and marking transitions—reduces the number of passes required through the text.

A third pitfall occurs in the Listening section when candidates attempt to transcribe audio verbatim rather than capturing meaning in abbreviated notes. Full transcription is neither achievable nor necessary; the goal is sufficient content capture to answer comprehension and inference questions accurately. Shortening this habit alone can reclaim several minutes of effective answering time per section.

In Speaking, the most damaging pitfall is beginning the response without a clear structure, which leads to rambling, repetition, and premature time expiry. Candidates should invest the full preparation period in a mental or written outline before beginning to speak. Even a 5-second silent plan produces a materially better-structured response than speaking without direction.

In Writing, candidates who attempt to compose from scratch during the test—deciding structure, content, and language simultaneously—produce slower, lower-quality work than those who pre-establish template structures and rehearse transition phrases. Template familiarity does not produce formulaic writing; it frees cognitive capacity for quality of expression and argument development.

Per-section timing reference table

The following table summarises the primary pacing parameters for each section. These figures represent recommended allocations; individual candidates with particular strengths or weaknesses in a section may adjust within the total time limit, provided the adjustment is planned in advance and validated through practice.

Section	Total time	Questions / Tasks	Recommended per-item budget	Key monitoring checkpoint
Reading	35 minutes	20 questions (2 passages)	45–90 seconds, by question type	After every 5 questions; target 17 min for first passage
Listening	36 minutes	28 questions (4–6 clips)	30–60 seconds, by question type	After each audio clip; no time check during playback
Speaking	16 minutes	4 tasks	15–45 seconds preparation; 45–60 seconds response	Visible countdown timer per task; stop 5 sec before end
Writing	29 minutes	2 tasks	18–20 min (Integrated); 20–22 min (Independent)	After Integrated task completion; 3-min buffer before end

Building pacing consistency through deliberate practice

Pacing strategy is only valuable if it can be executed under exam conditions. Building automatic pacing responses requires deliberate practice structured around three activities: timed section drills, full-length practice tests under simulated conditions, and systematic debrief of pacing performance.

Timed section drills isolate a single section and apply the recommended time budgets in a focused, low-pressure environment. For Reading, this means completing a two-passage set with a stopwatch set to 35 minutes and recording both the score and the time at which each question was answered. Identifying patterns in where time was overrun—such as consistently exceeding the budget on inference questions—allows targeted reduction of those specific delays. For Listening, drills should include note-review immediately after each clip, ensuring that notes are sufficient for answering without replay. For Speaking, recording responses and timing them precisely reveals the difference between intended and actual speaking time.

Full-length practice tests administered under strict timed conditions are the most reliable predictor of pacing performance on test day. The TOEFL iBT practice tests available through official channels replicate the interface, timing, and section transitions of the actual exam. Sitting these tests in a single uninterrupted session—rather than spread across multiple shorter sessions—conditions the candidate for the mental stamina required on test day. The score report from each full practice test should include a section-by-section timing audit: total time, time per section, time at which each question was answered, and any sections where time expired before completion.

Systematic debrief is the third critical component. After each practice test, the candidate should identify two pacing errors—one minor and one major—and commit to a specific corrective action. For example, a minor error might be spending 90 seconds on a vocabulary question that could have been answered in 25 seconds; the corrective action is to set a 30-second maximum for vocabulary questions on the next practice session. A major error might be under-running the Independent Writing task, leaving only 18 minutes when 21 was planned; the corrective action is to incorporate a visible countdown into the writing template rehearsal. Changes implemented one at a time accumulate into significantly improved pacing behaviour over four to six weeks of preparation.

Adapting your pacing plan to your language profile

Candidates whose first language is structurally very different from English may require modified pacing approaches. Similarly, candidates with high reading speed but constrained listening proficiency—or the reverse—should calibrate their section-specific time budgets to reflect their authentic performance differentials rather than applying uniform recommendations.

If a candidate consistently scores above 28 in Reading during practice tests while scoring below 22 in Listening, the strategic conclusion is not to allocate more Reading time (which would worsen the Listening score). Instead, the candidate should allocate additional preparation time to listening comprehension skills—active listening practice, note-taking drills, and exposure to academic lecture registers—while maintaining the standard Reading pacing budget, since this already yields acceptable results. Over-compensating by extending Reading time is a zero-sum trade-off that improves an already strong section at the expense of a weak one.

For Speaking, candidates whose first language has a significantly different rhythm, intonation, or stress pattern from English may find the 45–60 second response window more constraining than average. For these candidates, the preparation focus should be on reducing the cognitive load of content generation: pre-prepared structures, reusable example templates, and rehearsed transition phrases allow more processing capacity to be devoted to delivery quality. The pacing budget itself should not be extended, because the TOEFL scoring system penalises responses that do not demonstrate sufficient development within the allocated time.

Writing candidates who are comfortable with English academic conventions but find speed a constraint can benefit from pre-built paragraph templates and a library of transitional phrases that can be deployed without composition effort. The template provides the structure; the phrase library provides the connective tissue. This approach does not produce generic writing—content remains the candidate's own—it simply accelerates the mechanical phase of the writing process.

Conclusion and next steps

Effective TOEFL pacing strategy is a structured, pre-planned, and deliberately practised skill that operates across all four sections of the exam. Candidates who establish clear time budgets, monitor progress actively against those budgets, and have pre-planned trade-offs for moments of overrun will consistently outperform those who approach the exam with general time awareness but no specific allocation strategy. The section-by-section frameworks and per-question budgets described in this article provide the scaffolding; the deliberate practice fills it with reliable habit.

TestPrep's complimentary diagnostic assessment offers a natural starting point for candidates seeking a sharper preparation plan, providing a baseline score and section-level timing profile against which structured pacing improvements can be measured.

Frequently asked questions

What is the safest time per question in the TOEFL Reading section to avoid running out of time?

A practical target is 1 minute 30 seconds to 2 minutes per question across the 20 Reading items, with faster handling of factual and vocabulary questions (25–45 seconds) and more time reserved for inference and rhetorical purpose questions (60–90 seconds). If time falls below 3 minutes with questions remaining, select the best answer and move on rather than leaving items unanswered.

How should I allocate my 16 minutes in the TOEFL Speaking section across the four tasks?

The recommended allocation is approximately 2–3 minutes for each of the three integrated tasks (including preparation time) and 1–2 minutes for the Independent task, with the majority of each task's window devoted to the response itself. Maintaining a visible countdown and concluding the response 5 seconds before expiry prevents overrun, which the scoring system penalises.

Is it possible to transfer time between TOEFL sections if I finish one section early?

No. Each TOEFL section has a fixed time allocation that cannot be redistributed. Time saved in Reading cannot be added to Writing, and time remaining at the end of Listening cannot be carried forward. This reinforces the importance of adhering to per-section budgets rather than assuming flexibility will be available on the day.

What should I do if I consistently exceed my per-question time budget during practice tests?

Identify the specific question type causing the overrun, then isolate that type in targeted drills. For example, if inference questions consume 2 minutes instead of the target 60 seconds, practise inference questions under a strict 60-second ceiling until the process is automated. Additionally, applying a firm per-item ceiling during practice—stopping and selecting at the limit rather than continuing to deliberate—prevents the habit of excessive deliberation from developing.

How many full-length practice tests should I complete before my TOEFL exam date to validate my pacing strategy?

A minimum of three full-length practice tests under timed, simulated conditions is recommended to validate and fine-tune pacing across all four sections. More may be beneficial if significant section-level score or timing adjustments are required. Each practice test should be followed by a section-by-section timing audit to identify specific pacing patterns and corrective actions.