CELPIP® Speaking Task 1 sample: Different Plans for a Fence

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 friend Ethan in Saint John shares an aging backyard fence with his neighbour. The neighbour wants a tall, solid replacement costing $2,400 and expects Ethan to pay half, but Ethan can afford only $500 and worries about shade on his vegetable garden. Some sections are still sturdy, although others need repairs. Advise Ethan on discussing the fence and finding a workable agreement.

Model answers

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

Level 7 sample answer

190 words

Ethan, I wouldn't agree to pay half just to keep the conversation friendly. Half is $1,200, and that's much more than your $500 budget. You should explain that limit before your neighbour makes any plans.

First, ask why they want a tall, solid fence. Maybe privacy is their main concern, but you need to hear their reason. Then explain why sunlight matters for your vegetable garden. It will be easier to find an answer if you both understand the problem.

Also, get a price for repairing the damaged sections. Some parts are still strong, so replacing everything may not be necessary. A repair could cost less and give you more time to save.

You could look at different designs together too. Um, a lower section near the garden might help, if your neighbour is comfortable with that. Don't choose anything until you have checked how much shade it could make.

Finally, write down whatever you agree on, including the cost. The total price need to be clear before work starts. It may take a few conversations, but that is better than spending money you don't have and feeling unhappy afterward.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer gives clear, relevant advice about Ethan's budget, garden, and repair options. Compared with the higher answers, its reasoning is less developed, its wording is more general, and a grammar slip interrupts an otherwise easy-to-follow response.

First, ask why they want a tall, solid fence. — Content/Coherence: This starts a sensible discussion before proposing solutions. The higher answers connect the neighbour's possible privacy concern more directly to changing only the section where privacy is needed.
It will be easier to find an answer if you both understand the problem. — Vocabulary: The meaning is clear, but 'find an answer' and 'understand the problem' are general expressions. The higher answers use more precise language about priorities, negotiation, scope, and contributions.
The total price need to be clear before work starts. — Listenability: The short sentence is easy to follow, but 'price need' should be 'price needs.' The higher answers maintain smoother grammatical control while explaining more complex conditions.
Also, get a price for repairing the damaged sections. — Task Fulfillment: This uses the important detail that some fence sections remain sturdy and offers a potentially cheaper solution. The higher answers develop the advice through price comparisons, itemized quotes, and a staged approach if necessary.

Level 9 sample answer

230 words

Ethan, I'd start by being clear about the money, because your neighbour may be planning around a contribution you simply can't make. Half of $2,400 is $1,200, while your maximum is $500. Explain that calmly and avoid suggesting you might somehow find the difference.

Then ask what they most want from the replacement. If privacy is the priority, you might be able to address the most exposed section without building a tall, solid fence along the entire boundary. Explain your garden concern at the same time, so they understand that you're considering how the design affects your yard as well as the price.

I'd get a separate quote for repairing the damaged sections. Since some sections are still sturdy, repairs could be a reasonable option, even if they're only an interim solution. Seeing both prices would give you a useful starting point for negotiation.

Before choosing a design, look at the garden together at different times of day and discuss where extra shade would fall. You could ask the fence contractor about lower sections or a more open design, provided those options meet your neighbour's needs too.

Finally, agree on the design, total cost, and each person's contribution before any work is booked. Don't let an informal conversation become a blank cheque. A slower decision that respects your budget is much better than a quick agreement that causes lasting tension.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer develops a clear negotiation strategy, with precise financial advice, conditional solutions, and fluent wording. Compared with level 11, it gives less detail about defining the work and finding a practical fallback if the quoted options remain unaffordable.

Seeing both prices would give you a useful starting point for negotiation. — Content/Coherence: This explains why comparing repair and replacement prices helps Ethan, connecting an action to its purpose. The higher answer develops the decision further by introducing staged work if neither complete option fits his budget.
Don't let an informal conversation become a blank cheque. — Vocabulary: The idiom concisely captures the risk of accepting an undefined financial commitment. The higher answer adds precision through terms such as 'scope' and 'contributions,' identifying exactly what Ethan should settle before ordering.
Explain that calmly and avoid suggesting you might somehow find the difference. — Listenability: The coordinated instructions flow naturally and make Ethan's financial boundary easy to follow. The higher answer strengthens this delivery with an explicit explanation of how discussing designs could accidentally imply agreement to pay.
Finally, agree on the design, total cost, and each person's contribution before any work is booked. — Task Fulfillment: This gives Ethan concrete points to settle before committing, addressing the risk of disagreement over payment. The higher answer also specifies recording the scope and offers contractor-checked staging as another route to agreement.

Level 11 sample answer

256 words

Ethan, I'd make your $500 ceiling clear before discussing designs in detail. Your neighbour's preferred fence would require $1,200 from you if the cost were divided equally, so there's a substantial gap to resolve. Being direct now will prevent enthusiasm for a design from being mistaken for agreement to fund it.

Ask what the tall, solid fence is intended to achieve. If the main concern is privacy in one part of the yard, a targeted change might meet that need without shading the entire garden. Explain that sunlight affects what you can grow, and invite your neighbour to look at the garden with you. That makes your concern tangible rather than sounding like a general objection to their idea.

I'd then request itemized quotes for two options: repairing the sections that need attention and replacing the whole fence. Because some sections remain sturdy, retaining them deserves serious consideration. Ask the contractor how different heights and more open designs would affect both privacy and shade, rather than assuming there's only one suitable replacement.

If neither complete option fits your budget, discuss doing the work in stages. That could address the weakest sections first while giving you both time to consider the rest, provided a contractor confirms that the approach is practical.

Before anything is ordered, record the agreed design, scope, and contributions. If your neighbour still prefers the $2,400 option, don't allow their preference to stretch your promise beyond $500. A workable compromise has to respect your finances as well as both people's enjoyment of their yards.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer combines precise language with well-developed reasoning about money, privacy, shade, and the condition of the fence. Its strength is anticipating misunderstandings and offering practical alternatives, including staged work subject to a contractor's assessment.

Being direct now will prevent enthusiasm for a design from being mistaken for agreement to fund it. — Content/Coherence: This explains why the budget discussion must come first. It anticipates a specific misunderstanding between Ethan and his neighbour, giving the advice a stronger causal structure than a simple sequence of suggestions.
I'd then request itemized quotes for two options: repairing the sections that need attention and replacing the whole fence. — Vocabulary: The term 'itemized quotes' makes the request precise, while the parallel wording clearly distinguishes repair from replacement. The vocabulary helps Ethan compare the actual work involved without making the advice unnecessarily technical.
That makes your concern tangible rather than sounding like a general objection to their idea. — Listenability: This short explanation follows the invitation to view the garden, making the reasoning easy to track. The reference 'That' links the sentences smoothly, and the conversational wording supports a natural spoken delivery.
That could address the weakest sections first while giving you both time to consider the rest, provided a contractor confirms that the approach is practical. — Task Fulfillment: This develops staged repairs into a workable fallback, using the fence's uneven condition and Ethan's limited budget. The contractor condition acknowledges that staging needs practical confirmation instead of promising that it will automatically work.

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