CELPIP® Writing Task 2 sample: Basement Suite Electricity Survey

Responding to Survey Questions · 26 minutes · 150–200 words · Published 23 October 2026

Original practice questions in CELPIP® task formats, created independently by CELPIP Study.

Practice question

Diego manages eight basement suites in Victoria and is surveying tenants about covering rising electricity costs. Each suite uses electric heating and has its own electricity meter, although electricity is currently included in rent. The proposals are an $85 monthly rent increase with electricity included, or unchanged base rent with separate charges for actual electricity use. His administration budget allows only one billing system for all eight suites.

How should electricity costs be included in these rental arrangements, and why do you support that approach?

Option A: Increase monthly rent by $85 per suite and continue including electricity, providing predictable costs regardless of individual use.
Option B: Keep base rent unchanged and charge separately for each suite's actual electricity use, allowing savings but creating variable bills.

Model answers

Level 7 sample answer

164 words

I choose Option B because I would rather pay for the electricity I use. Since every basement suite has its own meter, this seems like a fair way to share the rising costs. It would also give tenants more control over their bills.

First, people have different daily habits. I am often out during the day, so I do not use as much lighting or cooking equipment as someone who stays home. With a fixed increase, I would pay the same amount even when I was away.

Also, a separate bill would help me understand my spending. If one month cost more, I could check whether I had used the heating too much. This information would be an useful reminder to turn things off when they are not needed.

Winter bills could be higher, and that would need some planning. However, I could put some money aside during warmer months. For these reason, I think paying according to the meter is the better choice.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer clearly supports separate billing and gives relevant personal reasons, with an understandable paragraph structure. Compared with the stronger answers, its reasoning is simpler, its vocabulary is more repetitive, and some grammatical errors interrupt otherwise clear writing.

With a fixed increase, I would pay the same amount even when I was away. — Content/Coherence: The example clearly connects absence with the fairness of separate billing. The level 11 answer develops this distinction more carefully by specifying which electricity uses would fall and qualifying the likely savings.
It would also give tenants more control over their bills. — Vocabulary: The language communicates the benefit clearly, but “more control” remains broad. The higher-level answers use more precise expressions to distinguish budgeting predictability, actual consumption and incentives to conserve.
This information would be an useful reminder to turn things off when they are not needed. — Readability: The sentence is easy to understand, but “an useful” should be “a useful.” The level 9 and level 11 answers show stronger grammatical control while explaining similarly practical ideas.
Since every basement suite has its own meter, this seems like a fair way to share the rising costs. — Task Fulfillment: This uses the existing meters appropriately to justify Option B. A stronger response would explain more explicitly why linking each suite’s payment to its consumption is preferable to the uniform increase.
However, I could put some money aside during warmer months. — Content/Coherence: This offers a practical response to higher winter bills, but the trade-off receives brief treatment. The stronger answers explain why seasonal predictability matters before deciding whether savings or certainty deserves greater weight.

Level 9 sample answer

177 words

Option A would be my choice because a fixed $85 increase would make my housing expenses easier to plan. Electricity use changes throughout the year, but my income does not necessarily rise when the weather gets colder.

Predictability matters most during winter. In a previous basement suite, I kept a close eye on the thermostat because I worried about the next bill. Having electricity included would give me peace of mind while still allowing me to use heating sensibly. I would know the full monthly cost before committing to other expenses.

A single rental payment would also simplify my routine. I already track groceries, transportation and several payment dates. Combining rent and electricity would mean one less bill to check, which is especially useful during busy weeks at work.

I recognise that tenants who use very little electricity might save money with separate billing. That is a real advantage, and the individual meters make it possible. Nevertheless, I would accept paying more in some warmer months to avoid unpredictable winter charges. Diego should choose the fixed increase.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer develops Option A through a relevant personal example, fluent sentences and a balanced concession. It is more polished than level 7, but its emphasis on personal reassurance and convenience offers less analytical depth than level 11’s explanation of consumption and incentives.

In a previous basement suite, I kept a close eye on the thermostat because I worried about the next bill. — Content/Coherence: The personal example makes winter uncertainty concrete and supports the preference for predictable expenses. The level 11 answer goes further analytically by explaining how the billing arrangement changes the relationship between behaviour and cost.
I would accept paying more in some warmer months to avoid unpredictable winter charges. — Vocabulary: The contrast between warmer-month payments and unpredictable winter charges expresses the trade-off precisely. Level 11 sustains this precision across a broader explanation of fairness, consumption and conservation.
Having electricity included would give me peace of mind while still allowing me to use heating sensibly. — Readability: The sentence smoothly combines reassurance with sensible heating use, showing stronger control than level 7. To approach level 11, this fluency would need equally sustained analytical development.
Combining rent and electricity would mean one less bill to check — Task Fulfillment: This identifies a practical advantage of Option A for tenants. A more comprehensive response could also connect the proposed arrangement to Diego’s requirement to use the same billing system across all eight suites.
I recognise that tenants who use very little electricity might save money with separate billing. — Content/Coherence: The concession fairly acknowledges Option B’s appeal before reaffirming the preference for certainty. Level 11 integrates its counterargument more closely with the suites’ electric heating and gives a specific response to that concern.

Level 11 sample answer

184 words

I favour Option B because the existing individual meters provide a reasonable basis for charging each suite for its own electricity. A uniform $85 increase would simplify budgeting, but it would also separate what tenants pay from what they actually consume.

That distinction matters when households have different routines. If I spent several weeks visiting relatives, my lighting and cooking use would fall, yet the fixed increase would remain unchanged. Metered billing would reflect at least some of that reduction rather than treating an occupied suite and a largely empty one identically.

It would also make conservation worthwhile. Seeing the monthly effect of using less electricity would give me a concrete incentive to adjust my habits. Under an inclusive arrangement, any savings I generated would be pooled, leaving little connection between my effort and my housing costs.

The strongest argument for Option A is protection from seasonal fluctuations, particularly because these suites use electric heating. I would address that risk by setting aside money during lower-use months. Although this requires more discipline, putting tenants in the driver's seat makes separate billing the better arrangement.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer builds a sustained argument connecting individual meters, fairness and conservation incentives. Precise wording, controlled sentences and a counterargument tied to electric heating make its reasoning more developed than the other answers.

it would also separate what tenants pay from what they actually consume. — Content/Coherence: This establishes the central principle behind the recommendation. The later examples about absence and conservation develop that same principle, giving the argument a stronger thread than a sequence of personal benefits.
Metered billing would reflect at least some of that reduction — Vocabulary: “Metered billing” names the arrangement precisely, while “at least some” carefully qualifies the savings. This avoids implying that reduced lighting and cooking would eliminate electricity costs in a suite with electric heating.
Under an inclusive arrangement, any savings I generated would be pooled, leaving little connection between my effort and my housing costs. — Readability: The sentence clearly links the billing arrangement to the consequences of conserving electricity. Its controlled structure handles a more complex causal explanation without making the reader work to follow it.
The strongest argument for Option A is protection from seasonal fluctuations, particularly because these suites use electric heating. — Task Fulfillment: The answer identifies a substantial advantage of the opposing option and connects it directly to the heating system. This makes the recommendation more persuasive because it addresses a central cost concern for these suites.
Seeing the monthly effect of using less electricity would give me a concrete incentive to adjust my habits. — Content/Coherence: This explains how separate billing could influence behaviour, extending the argument beyond paying a fair share. It develops the level 7 answer’s spending-awareness point into a clear connection between conservation and personal financial benefit.

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 a clear survey choice and develop reasons with concrete examples. Explain consequences, connect paragraphs and address the competing option where useful without losing your position.

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