CELPIP® Writing Task 2 sample: Photography Exhibition Feedback 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

The Shutter Trail Photography Club in London, Ontario, is planning a weekend exhibition of members' photographs. It is considering either anonymous displays with visitor ballots or named displays with short artist statements and scheduled discussions. Its small volunteer team can manage only one feedback system, and members disagree about whether independent reactions or conversations would help them improve more.

How should visitors respond to the photographs? Support your preferred option in about 150–200 words, with 26 minutes available for planning and writing.

Option A: Display photographs anonymously and collect visitor ballots, encouraging independent reactions but limiting discussion with photographers.
Option B: Identify photographers and include statements and discussions, offering richer feedback but requiring more visitor time and potentially influencing opinions.

Model answers

Level 7 sample answer

166 words

I prefer Option B because I would like to understand what visitors think about my photographs. A ballot can show which picture they like, but it does not explain their reasons very well.

First, discussions would give members some useful advices. I once showed winter photograph to a friend, and she noticed that the snow looked grey. I had not seen this problem before. Talking helped me understand what I could change next time. Visitors might notice other things that members have missed.

Also, an artist statement would make the exhibition more interesting. Sometimes a simple photograph has a story behind it. If visitors know why someone took the picture, they may spend longer looking at the details. This would also make it easier to start a conversation.

Anonymous displays could give fair results, but I do not think winning votes should be our main goal. Our club should help people learn from each other. For these reasons, I would choose the named displays and discussions.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 teaching answer clearly supports named displays, gives relevant reasons, and includes a useful personal example. Compared with the stronger answers, its reasoning is simpler, its language contains noticeable errors, and it gives less attention to the practical trade-offs.

Talking helped me understand what I could change next time. — Content/Coherence: The winter photograph example connects discussion with improvement, directly supporting the preference. A higher-level answer would explain more precisely how the visitor's observation could guide a photographic decision, as the strongest answer does with competing interpretations of scratched glass.
First, discussions would give members some useful advices. — Vocabulary: The meaning is clear, but “advice” is uncountable, so “advices” is incorrect. A higher-level answer would use accurate vocabulary and distinguish more precisely between observations, interpretations, and suggestions for improvement.
Also, an artist statement would make the exhibition more interesting. — Readability: The transition clearly introduces another reason, making the answer easy to follow. However, the sentence pattern and opening are straightforward. The higher-level answers use more varied structures to connect reasons, examples, and qualifications smoothly.
Anonymous displays could give fair results, but I do not think winning votes should be our main goal. — Task Fulfillment: This acknowledges an advantage of anonymous displays, but shifts the comparison towards winning instead of examining how independent reactions support learning. A higher-level response would weigh that benefit more fully and address the volunteer constraint and visitors' time.

Level 9 sample answer

178 words

I would choose Option A because anonymous displays would reveal how the photographs communicate on their own. That seems more useful than discovering which members are best at explaining their work.

Names and statements can unintentionally shape a visitor's reaction. At a small exhibition I attended, I initially overlooked a quiet street scene, then reconsidered it after reading the photographer's impressive biography. The image had not changed; my expectations had. Removing that influence would put experienced members and newcomers on a more level playing field.

Ballots would also allow people to participate without committing to a scheduled discussion. Someone visiting between errands could still examine the photographs and register a preference. This matters when the event lasts only a weekend and visitors may have limited time.

Conversations would certainly produce more detailed advice. However, the club must choose one manageable system, and anonymous voting would capture responses from a wider range of visitors. I would value that broad first impression, even though members would need to reflect carefully on what the results actually tell them about their photography.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 teaching answer develops a persuasive case for anonymous displays through a revealing anecdote, practical reasoning, and controlled language. Its main limitation compared with the strongest answer is that it identifies the value and limits of ballots without exploring as concretely how members could learn from them.

The image had not changed; my expectations had. — Readability: The concise parallel clauses and semicolon make the anecdote's lesson immediately clear. The strongest answer achieves similarly fluent reading while explaining the relationship between visitor responses and photographic decisions in greater detail.
Removing that influence would put experienced members and newcomers on a more level playing field. — Vocabulary: The idiom naturally expresses fairness between club members, and “influence” clearly refers back to the biography. The strongest answer uses similarly controlled vocabulary to distinguish preference from interpretation, giving its account of feedback greater precision.
Someone visiting between errands could still examine the photographs and register a preference. — Task Fulfillment: This concrete visitor scenario directly addresses the time demands of the exhibition and supports accessible participation. A higher-level treatment would connect that wider participation more explicitly to what members could learn, beyond collecting more preferences.
even though members would need to reflect carefully on what the results actually tell them about their photography. — Content/Coherence: This qualification recognizes that ballot results require interpretation, making the argument balanced. However, the reflection remains unspecified. The strongest answer demonstrates exactly what feedback reveals and how another system could conceal it.

Level 11 sample answer

186 words

Option B would make the exhibition a stronger learning experience. I would rather leave with a clearer understanding of one photograph than a ranking that tells me little about why visitors responded as they did.

Photography involves decisions that a ballot cannot easily uncover. My friend Freya recently photographed reflections in a bus shelter; viewers disagreed about whether the scratched glass distracted from the subject or supplied its character. A conversation revealed that difference immediately. A vote would have reduced those contrasting interpretations to a preference, concealing the very feedback she needed.

Artist statements could also give visitors a useful starting point. Someone unfamiliar with photography might hesitate to comment on composition but feel comfortable discussing a familiar winter commute. From there, the discussion could move naturally towards how the image conveys that experience.

Identifying photographers may influence reactions, and scheduled discussions demand more time. Those are real limitations. However, this is a club exhibition, where developing judgement matters more to me than producing an impartial ranking. Given the volunteer constraint, I would invest our available effort in exchanges that members can translate into better photographs.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 teaching answer combines precise language, fluent organization, and a fully developed explanation of why discussion supports photographic improvement. Its strength lies in showing exactly what useful feedback contains while acknowledging the competing option's benefits and the exhibition's practical constraints.

viewers disagreed about whether the scratched glass distracted from the subject or supplied its character. — Content/Coherence: The example presents competing interpretations of the same photographic feature. This makes the learning benefit concrete: discussion reveals why viewers respond differently, developing the argument more deeply than simply saying conversations provide reasons.
concealing the very feedback she needed. — Vocabulary: “Concealing” precisely describes the loss of explanatory detail when contrasting interpretations become a vote. The wording is economical and directly supports the central distinction between recording a preference and understanding its cause.
From there, the discussion could move naturally towards how the image conveys that experience. — Readability: “From there” smoothly connects a visitor's familiar winter commute with a discussion of photographic expression. The progression is easy to follow and shows how an accessible starting point can lead to a more thoughtful exchange.
Given the volunteer constraint, I would invest our available effort in exchanges that members can translate into better photographs. — Task Fulfillment: The conclusion explicitly incorporates the limited volunteer capacity and prioritizes a manageable feedback system. Following the acknowledgment of influenced reactions and greater time demands, it gives a clear, context-specific reason for accepting those trade-offs.

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