CELPIP® Writing Task 2 sample: Neighbourhood Pharmacy Service Survey

Level 7 sample answer

173 words

I think Option A is better. The pharmacy should keep its doors open until 9 p.m. on weekdays and open on Sundays.

Right now, the pharmacy closes at 6, and this is too early for many people. I finish work at 5:30 and I take the bus home, so I almost never arrive before 6. Last week my doctor send a new prescription for me, and I had to wait until Saturday to pick it up. Because of this, I started my medicine two days late.

And evening hours are not only for picking up pills. People can talk with the pharmacist about side effects or buy cold medicine for their kids at night. When my son had a cough in the winter, I wanted to ask somebody about right medicine, but every place near my home was closed.

Delivery is a good idea for seniors, and I respect that. But I think more people in the neighbourhood work during the day and need the evening time.

That's why I choose Option A.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer gives a clear preference and relevant personal examples showing why evening access matters. Basic grammatical errors, some awkward wording, and a brief comparison with delivery hold it below the more controlled and developed answers.

• Because of this, I started my medicine two days late. — Content/Coherence: This consequence makes the problem with closing at six concrete: the writer's commute delays treatment. A higher-level answer would connect this personal experience more fully to the needs of working customers across the neighbourhood.
• need the evening time — Vocabulary: The meaning is understandable, but the wording is awkward and general. A higher-level answer would express the specific need more naturally, using wording such as access after work or evening prescription collection.
• Last week my doctor send a new prescription for me, — Readability: The time reference requires sent rather than send. The example remains understandable, but this verb error interrupts otherwise straightforward narration; the higher-level answers maintain stronger grammatical control.
• But I think more people in the neighbourhood work during the day and need the evening time. — Task Fulfillment: This directly compares the services by suggesting evening opening would benefit more residents. However, that judgement receives little support. A higher-level answer would explain why the needs of working customers outweigh the access difficulties faced by delivery users.

Level 9 sample answer

186 words

I'm in favour of Option B, free prescription delivery on Tuesdays and Fridays.

My main reason is that delivery would help the customers who struggle most to reach the store. My next-door neighbour, Benoît, is eighty-one and gave up his driver's licence two years ago. He takes five different medications, and every month he either pays $18 for a taxi or waits for his daughter to drive in from Leamington. Delivery would let him stay independent instead of relying on favours.

A fixed schedule would also cut down on missed doses. Because Benoît's refills depend on someone else's free time, he has gone several days without his blood pressure pills more than once. Knowing his order will arrive every Tuesday or Friday would reduce that risk considerably.

I do understand the appeal of evening hours, especially for people who work until six. However, most working adults have options: they can stop by on Saturday, use a drive-through pharmacy elsewhere, or ask a family member to pick things up. Housebound seniors don't have those alternatives, which is why I think this service would make the bigger difference.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer develops a clear case for delivery through a detailed example, explains its practical benefits, and addresses the competing option fluently. Its narrow focus on Benoît and broad assumptions about working adults make the comparison less nuanced than the level 11 answer.

• Knowing his order will arrive every Tuesday or Friday would reduce that risk considerably. — Content/Coherence: This connects the delivery schedule to the earlier problem of missed medication, giving the argument a clear cause and effect. A higher-level answer would explain how arranging refills around delivery days supports that benefit, rather than treating predictable arrival as sufficient.
• Delivery would let him stay independent instead of relying on favours. — Vocabulary: Stay independent and relying on favours express the personal benefit naturally and precisely. The level 11 answer extends this strength by using vocabulary that also frames the broader decision, particularly the distinction between convenience and access.
• I do understand the appeal of evening hours, especially for people who work until six. — Readability: This clear transition prepares the reader for the competing argument, and the sentence is grammatically controlled. A higher-level answer would preserve this clarity while making the following discussion more concise and avoiding a lengthy list of possible workarounds.
• However, most working adults have options: — Task Fulfillment: The answer recognises that choosing delivery requires explaining why extended hours matter less. However, employment alone does not establish access to transport or family help. A higher-level comparison would qualify this claim and distinguish customers by their actual ability to reach the pharmacy.

Level 11 sample answer

193 words

Having weighed both proposals, I'd choose Option B, free delivery within 5 km on Tuesdays and Fridays.

Since the pharmacy on Ellery Avenue closed in August, Carrow Street has inherited dozens of its customers, many of whom chose that store precisely because it was a short walk from the seniors' apartments on the same block. Those residents now face a twenty-minute trek, which is manageable in September but daunting once the snowbanks pile up in January. A twice-weekly delivery would restore the access they've lost without forcing anyone to brave icy sidewalks.

I also suspect that evening hours would be underused. Whenever I've picked up prescriptions at 8 p.m. elsewhere, the store has been nearly empty, with staff restocking shelves rather than serving customers. Devoting twenty precious hours to waiting for occasional visitors seems a less effective investment than putting them on the road to deliver medication people genuinely need.

That's not to say extended hours would have no value; commuters would undoubtedly appreciate them. Yet someone who works until six can usually find a workaround, whereas a ninety-year-old without a car cannot. Given a choice between convenience and access, I'd prioritize access.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer combines a clear recommendation with a developed neighbourhood argument, consideration of limited staff hours, and a concise comparison of competing needs. Precise vocabulary and varied, controlled sentences make its reasoning persuasive and easy to follow.

• Devoting twenty precious hours to waiting for occasional visitors seems a less effective investment — Content/Coherence: This brings the staffing limit into the comparison and explains why the writer considers delivery a better use of resources. The reasoning is explicit, although the observation of quiet evenings elsewhere provides limited evidence about demand at Carrow Street.
• a twenty-minute trek, which is manageable in September but daunting once the snowbanks pile up in January. — Vocabulary: Trek, manageable, and daunting describe both the journey and its changing difficulty precisely. The seasonal contrast makes the access problem vivid and explains why walking to collect medication may become much harder for older residents.
• That's not to say extended hours would have no value; commuters would undoubtedly appreciate them. — Readability: The controlled sentence acknowledges the competing service before returning to the recommendation. The semicolon joins closely related ideas smoothly, allowing the writer to recognise commuters' needs without interrupting the argument.
• Given a choice between convenience and access, I'd prioritize access. — Task Fulfillment: The conclusion gives a clear principle for choosing between the services. It draws together the discussion of commuters and residents unable to travel, explaining why delivery would make the greater practical difference to the people the writer prioritises.