CELPIP® Writing Task 1 sample: Fair Rules for the Clean-up
Writing an Email · 27 minutes · 150–200 words · Published
Original practice questions in CELPIP® task formats, created independently by CELPIP Study.
Practice question
You and your friend Qian are organizing a neighbourhood clean-up in Lethbridge for Saturday. Qian wants to award a donated $60 grocery voucher to the team that collects the greatest weight of garbage. Teams assigned to paved areas can use carts, while the trail teams must carry bags and usually collect lighter packaging. The donor expects one winning team, and you must publish the contest rules tomorrow.
Write an email to your friend Qian.
- Explain your concerns about judging teams by garbage weight.
- Describe how the rule could affect trail volunteers and participation.
- Propose fair contest rules that still produce one winning team.
Model answers
Level 7 sample answer
175 words
Hi Qian,
I've been thinking about the contest for Saturday's neighbourhood clean-up. Giving the $60 grocery voucher to the team with the heaviest garbage seems simple, but I don't think it's fair.
The teams on paved areas can use carts, while people on the trails have to carry their bags. Also, trail teams usually find lighter packaging. Their bags might weigh less even if they spend same amount of time working.
This could make trail volunteers feel that their effort doesn't matter. Some people might want to change areas just to have a better chance of winning. Then we could have less volunteers on the trails.
Could we choose the winner by how well each team cleans its assigned area? We could take photos before and after, and compare the results together. If teams tie, we could draw one winner from those teams. The donor would still have one winning team, and everyone could compete on equal terms.
Let me know what you think before we publish the rules tomorrow.
Thanks for considering this,
Hiba
Why this answer is at level 7
This level 7 answer clearly explains the unfair advantage, its effect on volunteers, and a workable alternative. Its straightforward linking, broad judging standard, and occasional grammar slips make it less precise and polished than the higher-level answers.
Also, trail teams usually find lighter packaging.
— Content/Coherence: This adds a relevant reason why weight is unfair, alongside access to carts. The explanation is clear but presented as another item; the higher-level answers connect these conditions more closely to what weight actually measures.This could make trail volunteers feel that their effort doesn't matter.
— Vocabulary: The everyday wording suits an email to a friend and communicates the emotional consequence clearly. The higher-level answers use more precise language to distinguish feeling undervalued from questioning assignments or creating friction.Their bags might weigh less even if they spend same amount of time working.
— Readability: The comparison is easy to follow, but 'spend same amount' needs 'the' before 'same'. The higher-level answers maintain smoother grammatical control while explaining the same disadvantage.We could take photos before and after, and compare the results together.
— Task Fulfillment: This offers a practical judging method, and the following tie-break produces a single winner. However, 'compare the results' leaves the standard broad; the higher-level answers specify completeness of cleaning, with the top answer explicitly judging the proportion removed.
Level 9 sample answer
191 words
Hi Qian,
Before we publish tomorrow's clean-up rules, could we rethink how the $60 grocery voucher will be awarded?
Weight is easy to measure, but it would give the teams on paved areas an advantage. They can move heavier loads in carts, whereas trail volunteers must carry their bags and tend to collect lighter packaging. The scale would tell us what the garbage weighs, without showing how thoroughly an area was cleaned.
That could take the fun out of the contest for trail teams. Volunteers might feel their contribution counts for less, or ask to switch to paved areas. We want people to feel useful wherever they are assigned, especially when every route needs attention.
How about judging the improvement in each assigned area instead? We could take matching photos before and after the clean-up, then compare how completely each team cleared its route. If teams tie, we could draw one winner from those teams. The donor would still have a single winning team, but the judging would recognize results rather than heavy loads.
If you agree, let's settle the wording today so tomorrow's announcement gives everyone clear expectations.
Thanks,
Hiba
Why this answer is at level 9
This level 9 answer develops the fairness problem through clear contrasts, fluent sentences, and a collaborative tone. Its proposed rules address the task well, although the judging standard is less explicit than the top answer's proportional measure and its account of wider consequences is less developed.
The scale would tell us what the garbage weighs, without showing how thoroughly an area was cleaned.
— Content/Coherence: This explains why the proposed measurement misses the clean-up's purpose, moving beyond simply listing disadvantages. The top answer develops the distinction further by proposing a proportional measure that directly answers this problem.That could take the fun out of the contest for trail teams.
— Vocabulary: This natural informal expression suits Qian and captures the loss of motivation. The top answer adds more analytical precision by explaining how the imbalance could create friction and distract from the shared achievement.They can move heavier loads in carts, whereas trail volunteers must carry their bags and tend to collect lighter packaging.
— Readability: The controlled contrast brings equipment and garbage type into a fluent sentence. Compared with the simpler level 7 explanation, it reads smoothly; the top answer also develops the implication through the concrete example of a thoroughly cleaned trail.then compare how completely each team cleared its route.
— Task Fulfillment: This identifies completeness as the judging standard, supported elsewhere by matching photos and a draw for tied teams. The top answer makes the comparison more explicit by stating that judges should assess the proportion of visible garbage removed.
Level 11 sample answer
193 words
Hi Qian,
Can we settle the judging criteria before tomorrow's announcement? I'm concerned that awarding the $60 grocery voucher by weight would reward the type of garbage collected as much as the work involved.
Teams on paved areas can use carts, while trail teams must carry bags of what is usually lighter packaging. Even a thoroughly cleaned trail could produce a much lower weight than a paved area, leaving its volunteers at a disadvantage before Saturday's clean-up begins.
If that imbalance is obvious, people may question their assignments or feel their effort has been overlooked. A friendly incentive could become a source of friction, which would distract from the shared achievement of improving the neighbourhood.
Let's keep the donor's single prize but award it for the most complete improvement within an assigned area. We could photograph each route beforehand and afterwards, then judge the proportion of visible garbage removed rather than its weight. Publishing that criterion tomorrow would allow every team to work towards the same goal.
If two teams finish equally well, we could draw between them for the voucher. Would you be comfortable putting that approach in the rules?
Thanks,
Hiba
Why this answer is at level 11
This level 11 answer combines a precise diagnosis of the weight rule with thoughtful consequences for volunteer relationships. Its proportional judging standard, photographic evidence, and tie-break form a clear proposal, while controlled language keeps the email persuasive and collaborative.
Even a thoroughly cleaned trail could produce a much lower weight than a paved area
— Content/Coherence: This concrete comparison exposes the central flaw: successful cleaning can still produce a losing weight. It develops the reasoning beyond the other answers' descriptions of equipment and lighter packaging.A friendly incentive could become a source of friction
— Vocabulary: The precise phrase 'source of friction' captures a wider consequence than disappointment alone. It connects the prize to relationships between volunteers while remaining natural in a thoughtful email to a friend.Let's keep the donor's single prize but award it for the most complete improvement within an assigned area.
— Readability: This controlled sentence brings the donor's constraint and the proposed solution together. The direct, collaborative opening makes the recommendation easy to follow and maintains the friendly relationship with Qian.then judge the proportion of visible garbage removed rather than its weight.
— Task Fulfillment: This gives the clearest operational criterion across the answers: compare the share removed from each route. The surrounding proposal supplies photographic evidence, publication timing, and a draw if teams finish equally well, preserving a single winning team.
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