CELPIP® Speaking Task 7 sample: Living at Home to Save Money

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

Rents in Lethbridge have risen, and more young adults in their twenties are staying in their parents' homes to save for a condo or pay off student loans. Others insist on moving out at 18 or 19 to become independent, even if most of their pay goes to rent. Which choice do you think is wiser for young adults? Say which you'd recommend and explain why.

Model answers

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

Level 7 sample answer

197 words

In my opinion, it's smarter for young adults to stay with their parents for a few years, if family get along okay.

The main reason is money. Rent in Lethbridge is not cheap anymore. If you pay maybe $1,200 a month for a small apartment, that's a lot of your salary, and you can't save nothing. At home you can save for a condo or pay back your student loan much faster.

Second, living with family is not only about money. You can help your parents too, like cooking, driving them to appointments or shovelling the snow in the winter. My friend Brett lives with his parents, and he does all the yard work, so it's fair for everybody.

Also, um, I think you can still learn to be independent at home. You can pay a small rent to your parents, buy your own food and do your own laundry. It depends on the person, not the address.

But of course, if there is a lot of fighting at home, then moving out is better for your mental health.

So for most people, I think staying home for a while and saving money is the wiser choice.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 example gives a clear recommendation, relevant reasons and practical examples of independence at home. Compared with the other answers, its explanations are simpler, its vocabulary is more repetitive, and grammatical slips sometimes interrupt the flow.

If you pay maybe $1,200 a month for a small apartment, — Content/Coherence: The rent example makes the financial argument concrete and relevant to Lethbridge. However, the answer stops at saying saving becomes difficult. A higher-level answer would develop the comparison by explaining how rent affects progress towards a condo or loan repayment.
pay back your student loan much faster. — Vocabulary: This familiar wording clearly expresses a benefit of staying home. The vocabulary is useful but fairly basic; a higher-level answer would describe the financial trade-offs more precisely while keeping the explanation natural.
that's a lot of your salary, and you can't save nothing. — Listenability: The conversational wording is easy to follow, but the double negative distracts from the intended meaning. A higher-level answer would maintain smoother grammatical control, using wording such as 'you can't save much.'
So for most people, I think staying home for a while and saving money is the wiser choice. — Task Fulfillment: The conclusion directly recommends staying home and connects that choice to saving money. However, 'for most people' and 'for a while' leave the recommendation broad. A higher-level answer would specify the conditions that make staying home worthwhile.

Level 9 sample answer

238 words

I'd lean towards moving out early, even if it means a tighter budget for a few years.

The biggest reason, for me, is that independence is something you only really learn by doing it. When I was nineteen I shared a basement suite with two roommates, and within six months I'd figured out how to budget, how to deal with a landlord about a broken furnace, and how to cook something other than pasta. Those lessons stuck with me far better than any advice my parents gave.

Another consideration is the relationship with parents. Adults living under the same roof as their parents often slip back into old roles — the parent asks where you're going, you get defensive, and small things turn into arguments. Moving out lets everyone treat each other as equals, and honestly, visits become something you look forward to.

I'd also point out that there are ways to make it affordable. In Lethbridge you can still find a room in a shared house for around $700, and if you split the groceries and the hydro bill, it's manageable on an entry-level salary.

Of course, I see the other side. Saving for a condo is a lot harder when half your paycheque disappears into rent, and for students with big loans, staying home might be the only realistic option.

Still, if someone can swing it, I think the confidence they gain is well worth the cost.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 example develops its recommendation through personal experience, family relationships and affordability, with more varied vocabulary and conversational control than the level 7 answer. Compared with level 11, its financial reasoning and conditions for moving out remain less precisely developed.

I'd figured out how to budget, how to deal with a landlord about a broken furnace, — Content/Coherence: These specific experiences explain how moving out can build independence, giving the argument more depth than a general claim about maturity. A higher-level answer would also weigh those benefits more explicitly against the financial progress sacrificed through renting.
Still, if someone can swing it, — Vocabulary: The idiom sounds natural and suits the conversational recommendation. However, it leaves affordability loosely defined. A higher-level answer would combine this fluency with more precise language about the financial conditions needed to move out successfully.
The biggest reason, for me, is that independence is something you only really learn by doing it. — Listenability: The opening clearly signals the main reason and prepares the listener for the personal example. Phrases such as 'for me' and 'only really' make it slightly wordy. A higher-level answer would keep the conversational tone while expressing the central claim more economically.
for students with big loans, staying home might be the only realistic option. — Task Fulfillment: This concession directly addresses the prompt's concern about student debt and qualifies the recommendation appropriately. A higher-level answer would carry that qualification into a clearer decision rule explaining when independence justifies the rental expense.

Level 11 sample answer

257 words

I'd argue that staying at home for a few years is the wiser move, provided it's done with a clear plan rather than out of comfort.

Let's start with the numbers, because they're hard to ignore. A one-bedroom in Lethbridge can easily run $1,300 a month once you add hydro and internet. Over three years, that's close to $47,000 — money that, had it been saved instead, could have covered most of a down payment on a modest condo or wiped out a student loan entirely. Moving out at nineteen might feel liberating, but if it leaves you renting indefinitely, that freedom comes at a steep price.

Beyond the money, I'd push back on the idea that independence requires a separate address. My cousin Kenji lived with his parents until twenty-five, yet he paid them $400 a month, bought his own groceries and handled his own car insurance. By the time he moved into his condo, he was arguably better prepared than friends who'd been renting since high school and were still living paycheque to paycheque.

There's also a family dimension that's often overlooked. Parents in their sixties may genuinely benefit from having an adult child around — someone to clear the driveway after a storm or drive them to a specialist appointment.

That said, none of this works if the household is tense or if the young person drifts along without goals. Living at home should be a launching pad, not a hiding place.

So, as long as there's a deadline and a savings target, I'd stay put.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 example builds a connected argument through financial calculations, a detailed example of responsibility at home and clear limits on its recommendation. Precise vocabulary, purposeful signposting and a memorable conclusion make the position more fully developed than in the other answers.

Over three years, that's close to $47,000 — Content/Coherence: The calculation extends the monthly expense into a longer-term consequence, connecting rent directly to the condo and student-loan goals. This develops the comparison substantially, although the amount represents potential rent avoided before accounting for contributions to the parents' household.
Living at home should be a launching pad, not a hiding place. — Vocabulary: The metaphor concisely distinguishes purposeful saving from avoiding adult responsibilities. It gives the argument a memorable expression while reinforcing the answer's central condition: staying home should prepare someone to move forward.
Let's start with the numbers, because they're hard to ignore. — Listenability: This natural spoken transition tells the listener what comes next and why it matters. It introduces the financial evidence with clear emphasis, helping the longer argument remain easy to follow on the page.
So, as long as there's a deadline and a savings target, I'd stay put. — Task Fulfillment: The conclusion gives a direct recommendation with concrete conditions. The deadline and savings target resolve the concern that living at home could delay independence, bringing the financial and personal-responsibility arguments together.

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