CELPIP Writing Task 2 Template: Responding to Survey Questions
A five-paragraph structure for CELPIP Writing Task 2 that commits to one option, defends it with concrete reasons, and handles the counter-argument examiners look for.
The Celpip Plus team
Written and reviewed against the official CELPIP scoring criteria
Task 2 gives you a survey with two options and asks which you would choose. You have 26 minutes and 150–200 words.
The single biggest mistake is treating this as an essay about both options. It isn't. It's an argument for one of them.
Pick the option you can defend, not the one you believe
There are no marks for sincerity. Choose whichever option gives you two concrete reasons and a specific example fastest. Spend thirty seconds deciding, then commit — a response that wobbles between both options loses Coherence marks.
The five-part structure
| Part | Purpose | Roughly |
|---|---|---|
| Position | State your choice plainly | 1–2 lines |
| Reason 1 | Strongest reason, with detail | 3–4 lines |
| Reason 2 | Second reason, different angle | 3–4 lines |
| Counter | Acknowledge the other option, then rebut | 2–3 lines |
| Close | Restate the choice in new words | 1–2 lines |
Step 1 — State your position immediately
I would choose [option] because [one-line reason].
No preamble about how it's a difficult decision. Examiners are marking whether you take a clear stance.
Step 2 and 3 — Two reasons, two different angles
Weak responses give the same reason twice in different words. Pick two genuinely different categories:
| Angle | Example framing |
|---|---|
| Practical | cost, time, convenience, access |
| Personal | your routine, family, health, comfort |
| Social | the neighbourhood, coworkers, other users |
| Long-term | what happens in a year, maintenance, growth |
Each reason follows the same shape:
[Reason]. [One sentence expanding it.] For example, [a specific, concrete instance].
The example is doing the heavy lifting. "It would save money" is a claim; "our team currently spends about two hours a week on this" is evidence.
Step 4 — The counter-argument paragraph
This is what most test-takers skip, and it's the clearest single upgrade available on Task 2.
I understand that [other option] would [genuine benefit]. However, [why your choice still wins].
Grant the other side something real. A counter-argument that dismisses the alternative as obviously bad shows less control than one that concedes a genuine point and answers it.
Step 5 — Close without repeating yourself
For these reasons, [option] is the better choice for [context].
Rephrase — do not copy your opening line back. Repeated phrasing costs Vocabulary marks.
Worked walkthrough
Here is the whole process on one prompt, from a blank screen to a finished answer.
Prompt: Your local library is surveying members about opening hours. Option A: extend weekday hours to 9 p.m. Option B: open on Sundays. Which do you support?
1. Read it for who, what, and the ask.
The library wants members to pick one of two changes to its hours, and defend the choice. This is an argument for one option — not a weighing of both.
2. Plan — notes only.
A quick plan: pick the side you can back with two different angles and a concrete detail, then commit.
| Part | Your note |
|---|---|
| Position | Option B — open on Sundays |
| Reason 1 | (access) reaches shift-working parents and evening students; Sunday is the shared day |
| Reason 2 | (practical) busiest on Saturdays; a Sunday extends the weekend; weeknights sit half-empty after eight |
| Counter | later weeknights genuinely help commuters — but they can already come Saturday; Sunday-off workers can't |
| Close | Sunday spreads the library's value across more of the community |
3. Turn each note into a line.
Position:
I support Option B, opening the library on Sundays.
Reason 1:
My main reason is access for people who cannot come during the week at all. Parents on weekday shifts and students in evening classes already find the library closed by the time they are free, and Sunday is the one day most households share.
Reason 2:
Sundays also fit how the branch is actually used. It is busiest on Saturdays, so a Sunday would extend that weekend rhythm rather than stretching tired staff across five late weeknights that often sit half-empty after eight o'clock.
Counter:
I recognise that later weekday hours would genuinely help commuters who want to drop in on the way home. However, that group can already visit on Saturdays, whereas the weekend-shift workers Option B serves have no alternative day at all.
Close:
For these reasons, a Sunday opening reaches more of the community than a few extra weeknight hours would.
4. Read it back.
I support Option B, opening the library on Sundays.
My main reason is access for people who cannot come during the week at all. Parents on weekday shifts and students in evening classes already find the library closed by the time they are free, and Sunday is the one day most households share.
Sundays also fit how the branch is actually used. It is busiest on Saturdays, so a Sunday would extend that weekend rhythm rather than stretching tired staff across five late weeknights that often sit half-empty after eight o'clock.
I recognise that later weekday hours would genuinely help commuters who want to drop in on the way home. However, that group can already visit on Saturdays, whereas the weekend-shift workers Option B serves have no alternative day at all.
For these reasons, a Sunday opening reaches more of the community than a few extra weeknight hours would.
5. Check before you submit.
- The choice is stated in sentence one and never wobbles.
- Length is inside 150–200 words.
- The two reasons come from different angles — access, then practical use.
- The counter concedes a real benefit of Option A before answering it, and the close rephrases rather than repeats.
Full model answer
Prompt: Your building management is surveying residents about the shared courtyard. Option A: convert it into additional parking. Option B: keep it as a garden with seating. Which do you support?
I support Option B, keeping the courtyard as a garden with seating.
My main reason is that the courtyard is the only shared outdoor space in the building. Families with young children use it every afternoon, and older residents sit there in the evenings. Removing it would leave roughly forty households with nowhere outdoors to go without leaving the property.
The garden also does practical work that parking cannot. The trees keep the west-facing apartments noticeably cooler in summer, which matters in a building without air conditioning, and the planting absorbs rainwater that would otherwise pool near the entrance.
I recognise that parking is genuinely tight, and residents who drive have a fair complaint about circling the block after work. However, the courtyard would add only six or seven spaces, while the street permit scheme the city introduced last year is already reducing that pressure.
For these reasons, preserving the courtyard serves more residents, more of the time, than a small parking gain would.
Why this scores well: the position is stated in line one, the two reasons come from different angles (social, then practical), each carries a specific detail, the counter-argument grants a real point before answering it with a number, and the close rephrases rather than repeats.
Before you submit
- Your choice is stated in the first sentence
- Two reasons from genuinely different angles
- Each reason carries a concrete example, number, or detail
- One paragraph concedes a real benefit of the other option
- Closing rephrases rather than repeats
- Length is 150–200 words
Common mistakes
- Fence-sitting. "Both options have advantages" with no commitment reads as an unanswered question.
- Two versions of one reason. "It's cheaper" and "it costs less" is one reason, not two.
- Skipping the counter-argument. It's the difference between an opinion and an argument.
- Abstract reasons only. Without a specific example, every claim reads as filler.