Key Takeaways
- You have 3 minutes 30 seconds to answer two questions — down from 5 minutes in the pre-2025 CASPer format
- Both questions are visible simultaneously, so you can read them both before you start writing
- Aim for 80–120 words per question — enough for depth without running out of time
- Lead every response with an empathy acknowledgement, not a solution
- Typing speed of 60+ WPM is the minimum; 80+ WPM gives you meaningful thinking time
Why the 3.5-minute window changes everything
Before 2025, the CASPer-style assessment gave candidates 5 minutes for two typed questions. The current RACGP format allocates 3 minutes 30 seconds — a 30% reduction in available time. This change fundamentally alters your strategy. You cannot afford a leisurely read, extended planning, or polished prose. You need a reliable approach that lets you produce thoughtful, empathetic responses under genuine time pressure.
The candidates who struggle most with the time constraint are not necessarily less empathetic or less thoughtful — they simply have not practised producing quality responses at speed. This is a trainable skill, and this article breaks down exactly how to develop it.
How to split your 3.5 minutes
Both questions appear on screen simultaneously after you watch or read the scenario. This is an advantage — use it. Here is a time allocation that works well for most candidates:
| Phase | Time | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Read both questions | 15–20 seconds | Scan both questions before writing anything. Identify which question asks for empathy/reflection and which asks for action/approach |
| Answer Question 1 | 75–90 seconds | Write your response. Lead with empathy. Aim for 80–120 words |
| Answer Question 2 | 75–90 seconds | Write your response. Avoid repeating points from Q1. Aim for 80–120 words |
| Quick review | 10–15 seconds | Scan for obvious errors or incomplete sentences. Do not rewrite — minor typos do not affect scoring |
Read both questions first
This is the single most important tactical decision. If you start writing immediately after reading Question 1, you may duplicate points that belong in Question 2, or miss a nuance that changes how you should frame your first answer. Fifteen seconds of reading saves you from wasted effort.
The typing speed factor
Typing speed is the hidden variable that many candidates underestimate. At 3.5 minutes for two responses, the maths is unforgiving. If you type at 40 WPM and spend 20 seconds reading, you can produce roughly 93 words total across both questions — barely enough for one substantive answer, let alone two. At 60 WPM, you get roughly 140 words. At 80 WPM, you get roughly 187 words, which gives you genuine room for depth and nuance.
| Typing Speed | Total Words (3.5 min) | Words Per Question | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40 WPM | ~93 words | ~46 each | Severely limited — likely Q1–Q2 |
| 55 WPM | ~128 words | ~64 each | Tight — possible Q3 if well-structured |
| 60 WPM | ~140 words | ~70 each | Adequate — Q3–Q4 achievable with good structure |
| 80 WPM | ~187 words | ~93 each | Comfortable — room for depth and nuance |
| 100+ WPM | ~233+ words | ~116+ each | Excellent — maximum thinking time |
If your typing speed is below 60 WPM, improving it is the single highest-return investment you can make in your SJT preparation. Use our typing speed test to benchmark yourself, then spend 15 minutes daily on typing practice. Most candidates gain 15–20 WPM within 4–6 weeks of consistent practice.
The opening sentence: lead with empathy
Your opening sentence is disproportionately important. Raters review 40–70 responses per hour and form their initial impression within seconds. An opening that demonstrates genuine empathy immediately signals a Q3–Q4 response, while an opening that jumps to problem-solving signals Q2 or below.
The most effective opening sentences acknowledge the emotional reality of the person in the scenario. They do not use the word 'empathy' — they demonstrate it through specific, authentic language.
- Strong opening: "This must be incredibly stressful for Sarah — balancing her clinical responsibilities while dealing with a personal crisis is something many doctors face but few feel safe to talk about."
- Weak opening: "I would approach this situation with empathy and professionalism."
- Strong opening: "I can understand why Dr Chen would feel conflicted — being asked to compromise on something you believe is the right thing for a patient is deeply uncomfortable."
- Weak opening: "In this situation, I would first consider the ethical implications and then speak to the relevant parties."
The empathy test
Read your opening sentence back and ask: would the person in the scenario feel heard and understood? If your opening could apply to any scenario without modification, it is too generic. A good empathy acknowledgement is specific to the situation described.
The Acknowledge–Explore–Support structure
Rather than a rigid template (which raters will recognise and penalise), think of your response as having three natural phases. This is not a formula to follow mechanically — it is a way of thinking that ensures you cover what raters value most:
- Acknowledge — name the emotional reality of the situation. What is the person feeling? Why is this difficult? Normalise their experience where appropriate (1–2 sentences)
- Explore — show curiosity and nuance. What questions would you ask? What factors would you consider? Hold the complexity rather than jumping to a single right answer (1–3 sentences)
- Support — offer practical next steps framed collaboratively, not directively. What would you do with the person, not to them? (1–2 sentences)
This structure naturally produces responses in the 80–120 word range — the sweet spot for a single question within the time constraint. The key is letting the structure guide your thinking without making your response sound templated. Each scenario demands a different balance of these three phases.
Common mistakes that cost marks
Having reviewed hundreds of practice responses, these are the patterns that most frequently drag responses from Q4 territory down to Q2–Q3:
- Spending too long on Question 1 — candidates who invest 2.5 minutes on their first answer leave themselves only 60 seconds for the second. Both questions are scored independently, so a Q4 + Q1 is worse than two Q3s
- Formulaic openings — 'In this situation, I would...' or 'I would approach this with empathy and professionalism' are red flags for raters who see them dozens of times per session
- Clinical focus — discussing differential diagnoses, treatment plans, or clinical pathways when the question is asking about interpersonal judgement
- Listing without depth — 'I would listen, validate, support, refer' ticks boxes but demonstrates nothing. One well-developed point beats four superficial ones
- Ignoring the second question — some candidates write brilliant first answers and run out of time for Question 2. The rater scoring Question 2 does not see your Question 1 answer
- Over-editing — spending 30+ seconds fixing typos and rephrasing. Minor spelling errors do not affect your score. An incomplete thought does
Word count targets and realistic expectations
Many candidates ask how long their responses should be. There is no official word count requirement, but based on scoring patterns, 80–120 words per question is the productive range. Responses under 40 words almost never score Q4 because they lack sufficient depth. Responses over 150 words risk being unfocused or running into the time limit for the second question.
Quality always trumps quantity. A focused 85-word response that demonstrates genuine empathy and nuanced thinking will outscore a 160-word response that stacks buzzwords and lists actions without depth. Think of your word budget as a limited resource — every sentence should earn its place.
How to practise effectively
The most effective way to improve your typed response performance is deliberate, timed practice with feedback. Here is a structured approach:
- Benchmark your speed — take the typing speed test and note your current WPM. If below 60, dedicate 15 minutes daily to typing practice alongside your SJT preparation
- Start untimed — complete 3–5 scenarios without a timer. Focus on quality, structure, and empathy. Compare to model answers
- Add time pressure gradually — try 5 minutes first, then 4 minutes, then 3.5 minutes. Notice how your responses change under pressure
- Use AI feedback — our practice scenarios provide competency-level feedback showing exactly which of the 9 competencies you demonstrated and which you missed
- Review model answers — after each attempt, study the model Q4 answer. Ask: what did it include that mine did not? How did it open differently?
- Track progress — log your AI feedback scores weekly. You should see measurable improvement within 2–3 weeks of consistent practice
For a detailed breakdown of what makes model answers score Q4, read our article on Q4 vs Q2 answer comparison. Understanding the differences is as valuable as practising writing your own responses.