CELPIP® Writing Task 1 sample: A Longer Carpool Route
Writing an Email · 27 minutes · 150–200 words · Published
Original practice questions in CELPIP® task formats, created independently by CELPIP Study.
Practice question
Your friend Yaw drives you to work in Penticton for $25 a week, leaving at 7:15 a.m. and going directly to your workplace. Yaw now wants to collect another passenger 15 km away twice a week, which would make you late for your 8 a.m. start, although sharing among three people could lower everyone's gas costs. You need to agree on a four-week trial by Sunday.
Write an email to your friend Yaw.
- Acknowledge the proposed change and its potential benefit.
- Explain your concerns about the new journey.
- Suggest fair conditions for the four-week trial.
Model answers
Level 7 sample answer
162 words
Hi Yaw,
Thanks for driving me to work in Penticton. I understand why you want to pick up another passenger twice a week. Sharing the gas costs between three people could help us all, especially since I currently pay $25 a week.
But the new stop is 15 km away, and leaving at 7:15 a.m. would mean arriving after my 8 a.m. start. I need to be at work on time. A cheaper ride would not really help if I was late twice every week. I also do not want to make the other passenger feel unwelcome.
Could we leave earlier on those two days during the four-week trial? We should check how much extra time the detour needs before we decide. If everyone save money, we could agree on a smaller weekly payment too. Let's agree on trial by Sunday, so we all know the plan before it starts.
Thanks for trying to make this work for everyone.
Talk soon,
Yan
Why this answer is at level 7
This level 7 answer clearly covers the change, the lateness problem, and a possible trial in a friendly tone. Its straightforward development, grammatical slips, and loosely defined trial conditions make it less controlled and precise than the higher-level answers.
Sharing the gas costs between three people could help us all, especially since I currently pay $25 a week.
— Content/Coherence: This connects the proposed change to a concrete benefit and establishes the current payment clearly. The higher-level answers develop fairness further by also acknowledging Yaw's responsibility for providing the car and driving.We should check how much extra time the detour needs before we decide.
— Vocabulary: The word 'detour' accurately describes the route change, and the sentence is easy to understand. The higher-level answers use more precise language to propose an agreed departure time or an arrival buffer.If everyone save money, we could agree on a smaller weekly payment too.
— Readability: The intended meaning is clear, but 'everyone save' needs to be 'everyone saves.' The higher-level answers maintain grammatical control while discussing the more complicated issue of dividing costs fairly.Could we leave earlier on those two days during the four-week trial?
— Task Fulfillment: This directly addresses punctuality and the requested trial period. However, the conditions remain broad: the higher-level answers explain how to calculate contributions and review the arrangement, while the strongest answer also provides a fallback.
Level 9 sample answer
178 words
Hi Yaw,
Adding another passenger could be a good way to spread the gas costs, and I'm happy to consider it. Paying less than my current $25 a week would certainly be helpful. I also appreciate that you're the one doing the driving, so the arrangement needs to work for you.
My concern is the timing. With a pickup 15 km away, our usual 7:15 departure would get me to work after my 8 a.m. start twice a week. Saving a little money wouldn't make up for regularly arriving late. I'd rather raise this now than agree and put you in an awkward position later.
For the four-week trial, could we calculate an earlier departure for pickup days and agree on it by Sunday? We could divide the actual gas costs fairly, including the extra distance, instead of assuming an equal split automatically works. Let's also check in after the first week and adjust anything that isn't working. That should give everyone a fair chance without making an open-ended commitment.
Thanks for talking it through.
See you,
Yan
Why this answer is at level 9
This level 9 answer develops a balanced, tactful proposal with clear reasoning, fair cost calculations, and a scheduled review. Compared with level 11, it leaves the arrival margin and the response to an unsuitable earlier departure less explicit.
I also appreciate that you're the one doing the driving, so the arrangement needs to work for you.
— Content/Coherence: This broadens the discussion beyond the writer's savings and shows why Yaw's needs matter. It develops the fairness argument more fully than level 7; level 11 connects that consideration specifically to the car, costs, and convenience.I'd rather raise this now than agree and put you in an awkward position later.
— Vocabulary: The natural expression 'put you in an awkward position' communicates a delicate concern without sounding accusatory. Level 11 adds sharper language about why predictable lateness makes the arrangement unacceptable.Saving a little money wouldn't make up for regularly arriving late.
— Readability: This concise, grammatically controlled sentence makes the trade-off immediately clear. It is smoother than level 7's error-prone conditional wording; level 11 strengthens the boundary further by stating what the writer cannot commit to.Let's also check in after the first week and adjust anything that isn't working.
— Task Fulfillment: A review makes the trial practical and gives everyone a chance to raise problems. However, 'anything that isn't working' is broad. Level 11 names punctuality and payments as review topics and explains what to do if leaving earlier is unsuitable.
Level 11 sample answer
185 words
Hi Yaw,
I'm open to sharing the ride with another passenger twice a week. Splitting gas costs three ways could reduce my current $25 weekly contribution, and it makes sense to explore that. Since you're providing the car and doing the driving, your costs and convenience should be part of the discussion too.
The sticking point is the additional 15 km. If we keep leaving at 7:15, I'll miss my 8 a.m. start on pickup days. I can't commit to an arrangement that builds lateness into my workweek, even if it saves money. I'd also hate for the new passenger to feel responsible for a problem we could have anticipated.
Could we agree by Sunday on an earlier departure for those two days, allowing a buffer rather than aiming to arrive at exactly eight? For the four-week trial, let's calculate contributions from the actual route and gas costs, then review both punctuality and payments after week one. If an earlier start doesn't suit everyone, we should discuss another arrangement before making promises.
Thanks for being willing to work out the details together.
Talk soon,
Yan
Why this answer is at level 11
This level 11 answer combines a firm punctuality requirement with consideration for Yaw and the new passenger. Precise wording, controlled sentences, and specific trial conditions create a practical proposal, including an arrival buffer, a review, and a fallback.
I'd also hate for the new passenger to feel responsible for a problem we could have anticipated.
— Content/Coherence: This connects the timing problem to its possible effect on the friendship and the new passenger. It gives a clear reason to resolve the details in advance, extending the concern about making the passenger feel unwelcome in level 7.I can't commit to an arrangement that builds lateness into my workweek, even if it saves money.
— Vocabulary: The phrase 'builds lateness into my workweek' precisely describes a predictable problem caused by the schedule. The wording sets a firm boundary while keeping the focus on the arrangement and preserving a friendly tone toward Yaw.Could we agree by Sunday on an earlier departure for those two days, allowing a buffer rather than aiming to arrive at exactly eight?
— Readability: This longer sentence remains easy to follow: it moves from the agreement deadline to the departure plan and then the reason for extra time. The structure combines several relevant details without losing the conversational tone.let's calculate contributions from the actual route and gas costs, then review both punctuality and payments after week one.
— Task Fulfillment: This makes fairness concrete by linking payments to the actual journey and identifying what the review should assess. It develops the trial beyond a general promise to leave earlier or adjust unspecified problems.If an earlier start doesn't suit everyone, we should discuss another arrangement before making promises.
— Task Fulfillment: This provides a sensible fallback without assuming everyone can leave earlier. It completes the proposal by addressing what happens if the main solution is impractical, while leaving room for a friendly discussion.
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.
Cover each email bullet with relevant detail, explain its effect on the reader and make a workable request. Keep a consistent register, with an opening, connected paragraphs and an appropriate closing.
- 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.
- Readability: Look for increasingly controlled grammar, sentence variety, punctuation and paragraphing. Complexity helps when it keeps the message easy to read.
- 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