CELPIP® Writing Task 2 sample: Shared House Cleaning 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

Ifrah coordinates the residents' committee at Celandine House, a shared rental home for eight adults in Kingston. The shared kitchen and two washrooms need regular cleaning, and uneven contributions have caused disagreements. Residents can either contribute $35 each per month for a weekly cleaner or take weekly turns using a written cleaning checklist; the shared household budget cannot cover a cleaner, so the paid plan requires individual contributions. Under either plan, residents must still do their own dishes.

Which cleaning plan would you support for this shared house, and how would it improve life together?

Option A: Pay $35 per resident each month for a weekly cleaner, reducing shared chores while adding a regular expense.
Option B: Take weekly cleaning turns using an agreed checklist, avoiding fees while accepting responsibility for completing the work.

Model answers

Level 7 sample answer

168 words

I support Option A because paying for a weekly cleaner would make life in our shared house easier. Eight adults use the same kitchen and washrooms, so these rooms need regular attention. A service would give us a clear cleaning schedule.

First, it could reduce arguments between roommates. People have different ideas about what clean means. One person may only wipe the counter, while another expects the floor to be washed too. With a cleaner, we would not need to discuss about whose turn was done properly.

Also, paying $35 each month would save time. After work, I want to cook and relax instead of spending my evening cleaning a shared washroom. I would still do my dishes because the service would not include that job.

A schedule would save money, and I understand why some residents prefer it. However, it only works when everyone follow the checklist. I think the monthly charge is reasonable if it helps us keep the house clean and live together more comfortably.

Why this answer is at level 7

This level 7 answer gives a clear choice and relevant reasons about disagreements and time savings. Compared with the stronger answers, its reasoning is more straightforward, its vocabulary is less varied, and occasional grammar errors interrupt otherwise clear writing.

One person may only wipe the counter, while another expects the floor to be washed too. — Content/Coherence: The concrete example explains how different cleaning standards cause arguments. A higher-level answer would develop the connection further by explaining why a cleaner reduces the need for residents to judge each other's work.
we would not need to discuss about whose turn was done properly. — Readability: The meaning is understandable, but the extra word "about" makes the sentence grammatically awkward. The stronger answers express disagreements about cleaning standards with smoother, more controlled sentences.
keep the house clean and live together more comfortably. — Vocabulary: The everyday vocabulary communicates the desired outcome clearly. A higher-level answer would use more precise language to distinguish consistent cleaning, reduced coordination work, and better relationships.
I would still do my dishes because the service would not include that job. — Task Fulfillment: This correctly respects the requirement that residents continue doing their own dishes. A higher-level answer would connect this limitation more closely to its argument about whether the cleaner provides enough value for the monthly contribution.

Level 9 sample answer

176 words

I would select Option B and use a written cleaning schedule. Although a cleaner would be convenient, dividing the work among eight residents seems a reasonable way to maintain our home without adding another monthly expense.

The cost is my main concern. At $35 per month, each resident would spend $420 a year on this service. That could cover several grocery trips or other household needs. Since we would still have to do our own dishes, paying for a cleaner would not remove our daily responsibilities.

A checklist could also address the disagreements that have already occurred. In a previous shared apartment, the problem was not always unwillingness to help; we simply had different expectations. Once we agreed that cleaning included the sink, counters and floor, it became easier to pull our weight.

I would suggest allowing residents to exchange turns when work or travel creates a conflict, provided the change is recorded. Hiring help would avoid some scheduling difficulties, but a clear schedule would give us both fairness and flexibility. Ifrah should try Option B.

Why this answer is at level 9

This level 9 answer develops Option B through a concrete cost comparison, a relevant shared-housing example, and a practical arrangement for exchanging turns. It shows more flexibility and language control than level 7, though its explanation of how the checklist would resolve existing disagreements is less probing than the top answer's reasoning.

At $35 per month, each resident would spend $420 a year on this service. — Task Fulfillment: The annual calculation makes the individual expense concrete and supports choosing unpaid cleaning turns. A higher-level treatment would weigh that saving more directly against the time and coordination required to maintain the schedule.
the problem was not always unwillingness to help; we simply had different expectations. — Content/Coherence: The shared-apartment example gives a plausible explanation for uneven contributions and supports agreeing on cleaning standards. A higher-level answer would also examine whether residents could still interpret the agreed checklist differently.
it became easier to pull our weight. — Vocabulary: The idiom naturally expresses fair participation in shared chores, showing more range than the level 7 answer's mostly literal wording. A higher-level answer would combine this fluency with more precise distinctions between assigning work and ensuring consistent results.
I would suggest allowing residents to exchange turns when work or travel creates a conflict, provided the change is recorded. — Readability: The sentence clearly combines a proposal, circumstances, and a condition without losing focus. The top answer uses similarly controlled sentences to explore the further consequence: someone must track exchanges and follow up on missed cleaning.

Level 11 sample answer

189 words

I recommend Option A because a weekly cleaner would turn a recurring source of friction into a predictable household expense. At $35 per resident per month, the proposal deserves serious consideration, particularly in a home where eight adults share essential facilities.

A schedule distributes assignments, but it does not necessarily produce consistent results. Someone who considers a quick wipe sufficient may sincerely believe they have completed the checklist, while the next resident sees an unfinished job. A regular cleaner would provide a more consistent baseline without requiring roommates to assess one another's efforts.

The arrangement would also reduce the hidden work of coordinating schedules. If I exchanged a cleaning turn because of travel, somebody would still need to track that change and follow up if it was missed. Paying for a service would remove much of that administrative burden.

The cost is a legitimate drawback, and residents would still need to do their dishes. Nevertheless, the aim is to resolve disagreements over shared cleaning, rather than eliminate personal responsibility. Given the existing tension, I would spend the money on a dependable service that helps preserve comfortable relationships at home.

Why this answer is at level 11

This level 11 answer builds a focused case for Option A by examining both inconsistent cleaning standards and the hidden effort of managing a schedule. Precise vocabulary, controlled sentences, and a balanced treatment of cost and personal responsibility make its reasoning more developed than the other answers.

turn a recurring source of friction into a predictable household expense. — Vocabulary: The precise wording connects the existing disagreements with the proposed monthly payment. It establishes the central tradeoff efficiently and gives the argument a clear focus from the opening.
Someone who considers a quick wipe sufficient may sincerely believe they have completed the checklist — Readability: The layered sentence remains easy to follow while explaining a resident's perspective. The wording makes room for sincere disagreement, helping explain why a written checklist may still produce conflicting judgments.
somebody would still need to track that change and follow up if it was missed. — Content/Coherence: This develops a consequence of exchanging cleaning turns: coordination itself creates work. It adds a distinct reason for hiring a cleaner and connects the practical example directly to the argument about household tension.
The cost is a legitimate drawback, and residents would still need to do their dishes. — Task Fulfillment: The answer acknowledges both the financial disadvantage and the continuing dishes requirement. Its closing argument then weighs those limits against the specific benefit of reducing disagreements over shared cleaning.

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