CELPIP® Speaking Task 1 sample: A Crowded Storage Room

Giving Advice · Preparation: 30 seconds · Response: 90 seconds · Published 23 October 2026

Original practice questions in CELPIP® task formats, created independently by CELPIP Study.

Practice question

Your neighbour Rémi helps manage a small condo building in Sherbrooke. Its shared storage room is full of bicycles that some residents use daily, while others want space for winter tires. Adding racks would cost $600, several residents oppose an extra fee, and a plan is needed before winter. Suggest how Rémi could help the residents reach a fair decision.

Model answers

These are transcripts of a model response, provided for comparison with your own recording.

Level 7 sample answer

189 words

Rémi, I wouldn't ask everyone to pay for racks right away. Some residents may feel that they're paying for something they won't use, so you need more information before deciding.

First, ask people which bicycles are used often and which ones could be stored somewhere else. Some bikes might have been left there for a long time. But don't remove anything without checking, because it still belong to someone.

Then measure the room and draw a simple plan. You could show separate areas for bikes and winter tires. This would help residents see how much space each option needs, instead of just arguing about whose things are more important.

Also, get another price for the racks. Um, $600 may be more than the building needs to spend, and a smaller set could be enough. Ask about this in the next meeting so everyone hears the same information.

I'd try a temporary arrangement before winter too. Keep the daily bikes easy to reach and give tires a clear storage area. After a short trial, ask what worked. People may accept a change more easily if they can try it first.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer gives Rémi a clear, practical sequence and acknowledges both storage needs and objections to paying. Compared with the higher-level answers, its language is less consistently controlled, and its trial leaves the review timing and measures of success less clearly defined.

Then measure the room and draw a simple plan. — Content/Coherence: The advice moves logically from gathering information to planning the space. However, a single plan gives residents less basis for comparison; the higher-level answers distinguish layouts with and without additional racks.
People may accept a change more easily if they can try it first. — Vocabulary: The familiar wording clearly explains why a trial could reduce resistance. Higher-level answers use more precise language about access, expenses, and evidence to explain what would make the decision fair.
But don't remove anything without checking, because it still belong to someone. — Listenability: The warning is easy to understand, but the grammatical slip in 'it still belong' interrupts the otherwise straightforward phrasing. The higher-level answers express the same concern with more consistent grammatical control.
After a short trial, ask what worked. — Task Fulfillment: Reviewing a trial helps residents reach a decision through experience. However, the review remains open-ended; the higher-level answers set a review date before winter, and the strongest answer establishes what residents will assess.

Level 9 sample answer

228 words

Rémi, I'd slow down the discussion about the $600 and first establish what the room actually needs to hold. Otherwise, residents will keep defending their own belongings without seeing the whole picture.

Send everyone a short request to identify their bicycles and say how often they use them. Ask the residents who want tire storage how much space they need as well. Give people a clear response date, but don't treat an unanswered message as permission to remove anything. You're collecting information, not deciding whose possessions matter more.

Next, measure the room and prepare two simple layouts: one using the current equipment and another with additional racks. Keep daily bicycles accessible in both plans, because a storage solution that makes commuting difficult won't win much support. Show where the tires would fit instead of promising space that may not exist.

Once those options are visible, get another quote and ask whether fewer racks would solve the problem. The $600 proposal might be worthwhile, but residents deserve to know whether a cheaper option would do the job.

Finally, suggest a short trial of the layout that doesn't require an extra fee. Set a review date before winter so the decision doesn't drag on. If the trial fails, you'll have concrete evidence for discussing the racks. That should help everyone meet halfway and make the eventual spending decision feel fairer.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer develops the advice through clear alternatives, practical safeguards, and a review deadline. It connects residents' concerns to concrete actions more effectively than the level 7 answer, while leaving the trial's success criteria and the comparison of rack proposals less explicit than the level 11 answer.

Next, measure the room and prepare two simple layouts: one using the current equipment and another with additional racks. — Content/Coherence: The contrasting layouts turn the disagreement into a practical comparison and prepare residents for the spending discussion. The higher-level answer sharpens this comparison by specifying scaled layouts that demonstrate exactly what the racks would add.
That should help everyone meet halfway and make the eventual spending decision feel fairer. — Vocabulary: The natural expression 'meet halfway' suits advice about neighbours resolving a disagreement. The higher-level answer describes fairness more precisely through shared access needs and agreed measures of success.
You're collecting information, not deciding whose possessions matter more. — Listenability: The compact contrast makes the purpose of the inventory easy to follow and remember. The higher-level answer extends that clarity across the whole response by establishing fair access as its organizing idea from the opening.
Set a review date before winter so the decision doesn't drag on. — Task Fulfillment: This directly addresses the seasonal deadline and prevents the trial from postponing the decision indefinitely. The higher-level answer also asks residents to agree beforehand on whether items fit and daily access remains practical.

Level 11 sample answer

256 words

Rémi, I'd frame this around fair access to limited space, because a debate about bicycles versus tires could easily become personal. Both uses are reasonable; the question is which arrangement serves the building without imposing an unnecessary expense.

Start with an inventory that residents complete themselves. Ask them to identify their bicycles, indicate whether they need daily access, and register any request for tire storage. Include a response deadline and follow up with anyone who hasn't replied. That gives you a reliable picture without making assumptions about apparently unused belongings.

Then measure the room and circulate two scaled layouts. One should show what can be achieved by reorganizing the existing space; the other should demonstrate precisely what the proposed $600 racks would add. Daily cyclists should be able to retrieve their bikes without moving someone else's tires, or the plan will create a fresh source of friction.

Before discussing a fee, obtain a comparable quote and investigate whether a smaller installation would be sufficient. Residents who object to paying may reconsider if they can see a clear benefit, but their concerns shouldn't be dismissed simply because they use the room differently.

I'd recommend a temporary layout with labelled areas and a review date before winter. Agree beforehand on how you'll judge it: whether the registered items fit and whether daily access remains practical. If it succeeds, you've avoided an expense. If it doesn't, the next discussion can focus on evidence rather than competing impressions. A transparent process is your best chance of keeping everyone on board.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer organizes the whole recommendation around fair access and justified spending. Its precise comparisons, attention to unanswered requests, and agreed trial criteria make the process more fully developed, while controlled vocabulary and clear sentence patterns keep the detailed advice accessible.

Both uses are reasonable; the question is which arrangement serves the building without imposing an unnecessary expense. — Content/Coherence: This establishes a shared purpose that connects the inventory, layouts, quotes, and trial. It develops the lower-level answers' concern for fairness into a consistent basis for evaluating every proposed action.
Before discussing a fee, obtain a comparable quote and investigate whether a smaller installation would be sufficient. — Vocabulary: The words 'comparable' and 'sufficient' make the cost advice precise: residents need a meaningful price comparison and an installation that meets actual needs. This develops the simpler suggestion to get another price.
If it succeeds, you've avoided an expense. — Listenability: This short conditional gives listeners a clear outcome after the detailed planning advice. The following sentence addresses an unsuccessful trial, creating an easy-to-follow pair that explains the value of either result.
Agree beforehand on how you'll judge it: whether the registered items fit and whether daily access remains practical. — Task Fulfillment: Residents receive concrete, shared criteria for judging the trial. This directly connects fairness to both storage capacity and daily bicycle access, giving the eventual decision a clearer basis than a general discussion of what worked.

What moves an answer from 7 to 9 to 11

These are model answers written to show each level. The labels are practice estimates, not examiner scores.

Give advice that fits the person and their constraints. Develop suggestions with reasons, practical steps and a supportive tone rather than listing tips.

Content/Coherence: Level 7 models communicate the main ideas; level 9 models develop relevant details with clear connections; level 11 models sustain precise, well-integrated development.
Vocabulary: Compare adequate everyday wording with more varied, accurate choices at level 9 and flexible, precise expression at level 11.
Listenability: Higher-level delivery needs clear pronunciation, rhythm, intonation and controlled pauses. Transcripts suggest phrasing and organisation, but cannot demonstrate these audio features; a recording is needed.
Task Fulfillment: Compare how fully the response addresses the request, develops enough relevant detail and maintains an appropriate tone for the audience within the task limits.

Assess the criteria together. A longer answer or rarer words alone do not establish a higher level.

Answer this question and get your level