CELPIP® Writing Task 1 sample: An Evening Connection Lost
Writing an Email · 27 minutes · 150–200 words · Published
Original practice questions in CELPIP® task formats, created independently by CELPIP Study.
Practice question
You take two buses to reach an evening course in Kelowna, and a timetable starting next month will make the first bus arrive ten minutes after the final connecting bus leaves. Four classmates use the same connection, but moving the class earlier would exclude people who work until 5 p.m. The transit service is accepting timetable feedback until Friday.
Write an email to the transit service planner, Ms. Simran Batra.
- Describe the connection problem in the proposed timetable.
- Explain how the change would affect students attending the course.
- Recommend a practical timetable adjustment.
Model answers
Level 7 sample answer
158 words
Dear Ms. Batra,
I am writing about the new bus timetable that starts next month in Kelowna. I take two buses to an evening course. Under the new schedule, my first bus will reach the transfer stop ten minutes after the final connecting bus leaves.
Four classmates also use this connection, so the change affects several people. We cannot simply ask for a earlier class because some people work until 5 p.m. Without this connection, getting to the course will be much more difficult. It is important for us to arrive on time and attend regularly.
Could you consider moving the last connecting bus fifteen minutes later? This would give us five minutes to change buses. Another option might be an earlier arrival for the first bus. Please consider our request before Friday, while feedback are still being accepted. I would appreciate a reply about which option is possible.
Thank you for looking into this problem.
Sincerely,
Rémi
Why this answer is at level 7
This level 7 example covers the connection problem, students’ needs, and a practical solution in a clear email structure. Grammar errors and general descriptions of the consequences hold it below the more precise, developed responses.
Four classmates also use this connection, so the change affects several people.
— Content/Coherence: This connects the writer’s problem to a wider student need. However, the explanation remains basic; the higher-level answers develop the conflict between preserving the connection and accommodating students who work.Without this connection, getting to the course will be much more difficult.
— Vocabulary: The language is understandable but general. The higher-level answers describe the consequence more precisely: the proposed timetable removes a usable connection and threatens students’ ability to attend.Please consider our request before Friday, while feedback are still being accepted.
— Readability: The deadline is clear, but “feedback are” contains an agreement error because “feedback” takes a singular verb here. The higher-level answers maintain grammatical control while making similarly formal requests.Could you consider moving the last connecting bus fifteen minutes later?
— Task Fulfillment: This directly answers the recommendation bullet with an adjustment that would allow the stated transfer window. The higher-level answers also acknowledge that changing a departure could affect other passengers’ connections.
Level 9 sample answer
175 words
Dear Ms. Batra,
I would like to comment on the timetable taking effect next month. My journey to an evening course in Kelowna requires a transfer, but the revised schedule has my first bus arriving ten minutes after the final connecting service departs. This effectively removes the connection altogether.
Four classmates make the same journey. Although moving our class earlier might appear to solve the problem, that would prevent students who work until 5 p.m. from attending. We would therefore be trading one access problem for another. Having a reliable connection allows both groups to participate without choosing between work and their course.
Could the final connecting departure be moved fifteen minutes later? That would provide a five-minute transfer window. If changing that departure would disrupt other journeys, adjusting the first bus to arrive earlier could offer a workable middle ground. I would appreciate having these options reviewed during the feedback period ending Friday, with particular attention to whether they preserve other passengers' connections.
Thank you for considering the needs of evening students.
Sincerely,
Rémi
Why this answer is at level 9
This level 9 example develops the access problem logically, uses controlled formal language, and considers effects on other passengers. Compared with level 11, some wording is less exact and the closing request is more indirect.
We would therefore be trading one access problem for another.
— Content/Coherence: This clearly explains why moving the course earlier would not resolve the overall access problem. It develops the reasoning beyond level 7; level 11 further sharpens the argument by explicitly distinguishing attendance from convenience.adjusting the first bus to arrive earlier could offer a workable middle ground.
— Vocabulary: The phrasing is fluent, but “middle ground” is slightly imprecise because this is an alternative adjustment rather than a clearly defined compromise. Level 11 identifies the operational benefit more exactly: retaining the connection without changing the final departure.I would appreciate having these options reviewed during the feedback period ending Friday
— Readability: This sentence opening handles a formal request and the consultation deadline smoothly. However, the indirect construction makes the request heavier than level 11’s direct instruction to include the concern and advise on feasibility.Could the final connecting departure be moved fifteen minutes later?
— Task Fulfillment: The recommendation is specific and correctly addresses the missed connection, with the following sentence explaining the transfer window. Level 11 refines the request by explicitly asking the planner to assess feasibility.
Level 11 sample answer
184 words
Dear Ms. Batra,
Please consider an unintended consequence of the timetable scheduled to begin next month. To attend an evening course in Kelowna, I transfer between two buses. Under the revised timetable, the first will arrive ten minutes after the final connecting departure, leaving no usable connection for that journey.
Four classmates depend on the same transfer. Rescheduling the course would merely shift the difficulty: an earlier start would exclude students whose workday ends at 5 p.m. A timetable adjustment would preserve access for both groups, whereas a classroom adjustment would benefit some students at others' expense. The issue is therefore whether we can attend at all, rather than a preference for a shorter wait.
Would you assess the feasibility of delaying the connecting departure by fifteen minutes, allowing a five-minute transfer? Alternatively, bringing the first service forward sufficiently could retain the connection without changing the final departure. Either option would need to be checked against other passengers' transfers. Please include this concern in the consultation closing Friday and advise whether either adjustment is feasible.
Thank you for reviewing this scheduling gap.
Sincerely,
Rémi
Why this answer is at level 11
This level 11 example combines precise scheduling details with a persuasive explanation of equitable course access. Its controlled sentences, practical alternatives, and explicit feasibility request give the planner a clear basis for reviewing the proposal.
The issue is therefore whether we can attend at all, rather than a preference for a shorter wait.
— Content/Coherence: This draws a clear conclusion from the missed final connection and the work constraint. It gives the request greater force than the earlier answers by explaining exactly why the timetable problem matters.Rescheduling the course would merely shift the difficulty
— Vocabulary: “Shift the difficulty” concisely captures how an earlier class would transfer the access problem to working students. The wording supports the argument precisely without requiring elaborate or unfamiliar vocabulary.Alternatively, bringing the first service forward sufficiently could retain the connection without changing the final departure.
— Readability: This controlled sentence clearly separates the alternative adjustment from its intended result. The reader can readily understand which service would change and which departure could stay in place.Would you assess the feasibility of delaying the connecting departure by fifteen minutes, allowing a five-minute transfer?
— Task Fulfillment: This combines an actionable timetable proposal, correct transfer timing, and a request suited to the planner’s role. Together with the subsequent attention to other passengers’ transfers, it presents a practical recommendation for review.
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