CELPIP® Writing Task 1 sample: Opening the Reading Circle

Level 7 sample answer

173 words

Hello Emiko,

Thank you for offering our reading circle a free room on Tuesday evenings. I am writing because our members have different feelings about welcoming visitors. Some are happy to meet new people, but others feel nervous about reading aloud in front of strangers. They would prefer to keep the same group.

The room would give us a regular place to meet without paying a rental fee. Also, new visitors could bring different ideas to our discussions. However, some members is worried that they would feel less comfortable taking part. I want to discuss about a way to make the sessions work for everyone.

Could we welcome visitors but let each person decide whether to read aloud? People could listen first and join in when they feel ready. This would keep the group open without putting anyone under pressure. Please tell me if this arrangement would meet the library's condition. I could then share it with members and give you our answer by Friday.

Thank you for considering this.

Best regards,

Navdeep

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer clearly explains the disagreement, weighs practical benefits against members' discomfort, and proposes a workable compromise. Its straightforward development and noticeable grammar errors make it less polished and less insightful than the higher-level answers.

• Some are happy to meet new people, but others feel nervous about reading aloud in front of strangers. — Content/Coherence: The contrast clearly establishes the members' different reactions. A higher-level answer develops the consequence of that disagreement: opening the sessions could discourage existing members from participating.
• I want to discuss about a way to make the sessions work for everyone. — Vocabulary: The intended meaning is clear, but “discuss about” is an incorrect word combination. The higher-level answers use more natural phrasing and describe the proposed format more precisely.
• However, some members is worried that they would feel less comfortable taking part. — Readability: The transition connects the challenge to the preceding benefits, but “members is” breaks subject–verb agreement. Higher-level writing maintains grammatical accuracy while linking the room's usefulness to members' willingness to participate.
• Could we welcome visitors but let each person decide whether to read aloud? — Task Fulfillment: This directly addresses both the library's condition and members' discomfort. The higher-level answers make the arrangement more concrete by explaining alternative ways to participate and how the choice would be communicated.

Level 9 sample answer

177 words

Hello Emiko,

I would like to discuss the open-door condition attached to your offer of a free room on Tuesday evenings. Our reading circle is divided: some members welcome the chance to meet new people, while others worry that reading aloud before strangers will make them uncomfortable.

A regular library meeting space would be a real benefit, particularly because it comes without a rental charge. Welcoming visitors could also introduce fresh perspectives. However, we need to avoid a situation in which people stop participating because they feel expected to perform. The space would lose much of its value if members no longer felt comfortable using it.

Would the library accept a format in which everyone is welcome, but reading aloud is optional? We could explain that visitors and regular members may listen or contribute to the discussion instead. This would help newcomers find their feet while protecting everyone's confidence.

Please let me know whether that approach meets your condition. I can then take a clear proposal back to the group before our Friday deadline.

Best regards,

Navdeep

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer combines clear organization, natural vocabulary, and controlled sentences with a thoughtful explanation of why participation matters. Compared with the top answer, it is less explicit about applying the arrangement equally and securing Emiko's response before the group decides.

• The space would lose much of its value if members no longer felt comfortable using it. — Content/Coherence: This develops the challenge beyond simple nervousness by explaining how discomfort could undermine the offer's benefit. The top answer extends that reasoning to the supportive atmosphere the group needs to preserve.
• This would help newcomers find their feet while protecting everyone's confidence. — Vocabulary: The natural expression “find their feet” conveys newcomers' adjustment, while “protecting everyone's confidence” connects the proposal to members' concerns. The top answer adds precision by explicitly explaining that nobody would be singled out.
• some members welcome the chance to meet new people, while others worry that reading aloud before strangers will make them uncomfortable. — Readability: The balanced structure makes the opposing reactions easy to follow, with accurate grammar throughout. The top answer achieves greater concision and uses more precise language to describe the effect on confidence.
• I can then take a clear proposal back to the group before our Friday deadline. — Task Fulfillment: This respects the group's role in deciding and acknowledges the deadline. The top answer makes the sequence more actionable by requesting Emiko's confirmation by Wednesday, leaving time to seek members' agreement.

Level 11 sample answer

193 words

Hello Emiko,

Thank you for offering our reading circle a free room on Tuesday evenings. I would like to clarify a possible approach to welcoming walk-in visitors before we respond by Friday. Some members see newcomers as a welcome addition; others fear that reading aloud in front of strangers would undermine their confidence.

Your offer would provide a consistent meeting place without rental costs, and opening the circle could enrich our discussions. Nevertheless, accessibility involves more than an open door. If established members felt too self-conscious to participate, we could gain visitors while losing the supportive atmosphere that makes the group worth attending.

Could we accept visitors on the understanding that reading aloud is always optional? At the beginning of each session, we could explain that listening and joining the discussion are equally valid ways to participate. The same choice would apply to newcomers and regular members, so nobody would be singled out.

If this would satisfy the library's condition, please confirm by Wednesday. I could then seek the group's agreement before Friday to an arrangement that welcomes the public while respecting individual comfort.

Thank you for considering this proposal.

Best regards,

Navdeep

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer combines nuanced reasoning with precise, fluent language and a practical negotiation sequence. It explains how public access could affect the group's atmosphere, gives everyone equal participation choices, and leaves time for agreement before Friday.

• Nevertheless, accessibility involves more than an open door. — Content/Coherence: This connects the library's access condition to the group's need for psychological comfort. The following explanation develops that distinction through a concrete consequence: gaining visitors could weaken the atmosphere that keeps members attending.
• others fear that reading aloud in front of strangers would undermine their confidence. — Vocabulary: “Undermine their confidence” precisely describes the concern behind members' discomfort. It communicates the emotional stakes economically and suits a thoughtful, semi-formal email to a librarian the writer knows.
• The same choice would apply to newcomers and regular members, so nobody would be singled out. — Readability: The sentence clearly links an operational detail to its intended effect. Its controlled structure makes the fairness of the arrangement immediately understandable without adding unnecessary explanation.
• If this would satisfy the library's condition, please confirm by Wednesday. — Task Fulfillment: The conditional request respects Emiko's authority to interpret the library's condition. The Wednesday response date supports the following plan to seek the group's agreement before Friday, making the proposal practical to implement.