CELPIP® Speaking Task 7 sample: Hosting Visiting Relatives at Home

Expressing Opinions · Preparation: 30 seconds · Response: 90 seconds · Published 23 October 2026

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

Practice question

When four relatives travel a long way to visit a family of five in Québec City for two weeks, the family's small house, with three bedrooms and one washroom, may feel crowded, but a furnished rental nearby could cost around $1,800. Is it better to have visiting relatives stay in the family home, or to arrange a separate place nearby? Give your opinion and explain your reasoning.

Model answers

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

Level 7 sample answer

202 words

I think visiting relatives should stay in the family home, even if it's a little crowded.

The first reason is the money. $1,800 is a lot for two weeks. With that money the family could do many nice activities together, like a boat trip or dinners in the old part of the city. It is better to spend money on memories than on a apartment.

Second, the relatives travel far because they want to spend time with family. If they stay in another place, they will see each other only for some hours each day. When everybody is in same house, you can have breakfast together, talk late at night and the kids can play with their cousins.

Also, staying together is more welcoming. Some relatives, especially older people, might feel like they are not wanted if you send them to a rental.

Of course, it's not always easy. Maybe the kids have to share a room or somebody sleeps on the couch, and there is a line for the washroom in the morning. But it's only two weeks, so, um, I think people can manage.

So my opinion is, keep them at home and use the money for fun things together.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 example gives a clear opinion and understandable reasons about saving money and spending time together. Its development is fairly simple, with broad assumptions, general vocabulary and occasional grammar slips; a higher-level response would address the crowded household more concretely.

If they stay in another place, they will see each other only for some hours each day. — Content/Coherence: This supports the preference for shared family time, but assumes separate accommodation necessarily limits contact. A higher-level answer would acknowledge that relatives staying nearby could still spend much of the day together.
With that money the family could do many nice activities together — Vocabulary: The meaning is clear, but “many nice activities” is general wording. A higher-level answer would use more precise language to explain how shared outings could make the visit more memorable.
It is better to spend money on memories than on a apartment. — Listenability: The contrast between memories and accommodation is easy to follow aloud. However, “a apartment” is a noticeable grammar slip; a higher-level response would maintain that clear rhythm with more consistent grammatical control.
But it's only two weeks, so, um, I think people can manage. — Task Fulfillment: This acknowledges the inconvenience but largely dismisses it because the visit is temporary. A higher-level answer would explain how the family could manage sleeping arrangements and access to the washroom.

Level 9 sample answer

253 words

I'd actually argue for booking a place nearby, as long as it's within walking distance and the family can afford it.

The main reason is that two weeks is a long time to share a small house. A weekend is fine, but by day five, little things start to wear on people — who's using the washroom, who's up at six, whose turn it is to cook. My aunt Lucía stayed with us for ten days one summer, and even though we love her dearly, everyone was tiptoeing around each other by the end. With a rental, guests and hosts both get some breathing room, and the time they do spend together feels like a treat rather than an obligation.

Secondly, it's often more comfortable for the visitors themselves. After a long flight, older relatives in particular might appreciate a proper bed, their own kitchen and the freedom to rest without feeling they're in the way.

And realistically, the cost can be shared. If the relatives cover part of the $1,800, or if two branches of the family split it, it's far less of a burden than it first seems.

I won't pretend there's no downside. Something is lost when you don't share breakfast every morning, and some relatives might take it the wrong way. That's why it matters how you explain it: frame it as giving them their own space, not pushing them out.

All in all, a nearby rental keeps everyone on good terms, which is the whole point of the visit.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 example develops a qualified recommendation through a personal example, natural expressions and consideration of both comfort and cost. Compared with the strongest example, it could connect its reasoning more consistently to the household's specific constraints and make its affordability solution less dependent on assumptions.

everyone was tiptoeing around each other by the end. — Content/Coherence: The anecdote makes household tension concrete and supports the argument for privacy. A higher-level treatment would connect that experience more explicitly to the visiting group and the family's limited bedrooms and washroom.
With a rental, guests and hosts both get some breathing room — Vocabulary: “Breathing room” naturally expresses both physical space and relief from social pressure. This is more precise than the simpler answer's general wording; a higher-level response would sustain this precision throughout its practical reasoning.
A weekend is fine, but by day five, little things start to wear on people — Listenability: The time contrast and conversational phrasing make the argument easy to follow aloud. A higher-level response would preserve this ease while integrating the specific household pressures more tightly into the explanation.
If the relatives cover part of the $1,800, or if two branches of the family split it — Task Fulfillment: Cost-sharing directly addresses the main objection to renting and makes the recommendation practical. However, willingness and ability to contribute remain assumed; a higher-level answer would explain what to do if sharing the cost proved unrealistic.

Level 11 sample answer

245 words

I'd come down on the side of hosting relatives at home, even in a cramped house, though I'd make a few adjustments to keep the peace.

To my mind, the whole purpose of a long-distance visit is the unplanned time together, and that's exactly what a rental takes away. Relatives who've flown in from, say, Vancouver or overseas didn't make the trip for a scheduled dinner each evening; they came for the slow mornings over coffee, the kids showing their grandparents a school project, the conversations that drift past midnight. Once everyone retreats to separate addresses, those moments become far rarer.

Then there's the money, which is hard to justify. Eighteen hundred dollars is close to a month's groceries for a family of five. Spent instead on a couple of day trips and a few memorable meals, it would enrich the visit rather than divide it.

I'll admit that space is the real sticking point. Two weeks with nine people and one washroom would test anyone's patience. But that can be managed: a staggered shower schedule, an air mattress in the basement, and a rule that everyone gets an afternoon to themselves. If tensions still ran high, a hotel for the last few nights would be a sensible compromise.

Finally, there's something to be said for what hosting communicates. Opening your home, inconvenient as it may be, tells relatives they're family, not guests to be accommodated elsewhere.

So, cramped or not, I'd keep them close.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 example combines a clear position with vivid explanations of family closeness, precise language and practical responses to crowding. Its concessions and fallback arrangement make the recommendation persuasive while showing flexibility about the household's limits.

they came for the slow mornings over coffee, the kids showing their grandparents a school project — Content/Coherence: These specific moments explain why sharing a home could matter beyond simply spending more hours together. The examples give the central argument emotional substance and connect accommodation directly to the purpose of the visit.
I'll admit that space is the real sticking point. — Vocabulary: “Sticking point” precisely identifies the main obstacle, while “I'll admit” introduces a concession naturally. The language is expressive and conversational without making the argument difficult to understand.
But that can be managed: a staggered shower schedule, an air mattress in the basement — Listenability: The short introductory clause leads clearly into concrete examples. The parallel list gives the listener manageable steps and creates an orderly spoken rhythm after the admission that crowding would test everyone's patience.
If tensions still ran high, a hotel for the last few nights would be a sensible compromise. — Task Fulfillment: This fallback keeps the preference for hosting realistic. It explains how the family could respond if arrangements failed, balancing closeness and savings against the need to protect everyone's comfort.

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.

State your position and develop distinct reasons with concrete examples. Connect the argument and explain relevant trade-offs while keeping your position clear.

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