CELPIP Speaking Task 5: Comparing and Persuading

CELPIP Speaking Task 5 format and timing

Part 1 shows two options. You have 60 seconds to choose between them, with no spoken response. In Part 2, you see the option another person proposes. You then have a separate 60 seconds to prepare before speaking for 60 seconds.

The real task uses images and short information cards across two screens. Here, text stands in for those materials, and the full exercise is visible together. Use the selection stage to commit to your choice before comparing it with the family member’s alternative. This page’s exercise does not reproduce the test’s screen sequence.

The timings above are test timings. The response plan below is our practice suggestion; you can adjust its divisions to suit your delivery.

How Task 5 uses the four speaking dimensions

• Content/Coherence: compare the options using shared criteria, such as comfort, cost, or convenience. Explain why those differences matter to the people involved.
• Vocabulary: use precise comparative language rather than repeatedly saying your choice is “better” or “nicer”.
• Listenability: keep comparisons grammatically clear. Make sure the listener knows which option each pronoun refers to.
• Task Fulfillment: persuade the named listener to choose your selection over their proposal. A description of your option alone leaves out the central comparison.

You can acknowledge a strength in the other option. Explain why another consideration carries more weight for this particular decision.

A response structure for comparing and persuading

1. Selection, 60 seconds: choose between the first two options. Identify the facts that make your choice suitable for the shared occasion.
2. Preparation, 60 seconds: compare your choice with the other person’s proposal. Select a couple of useful contrasts and anticipate their strongest objection.
3. Opening, about 10 seconds: address the person and state which option you recommend.
4. Comparison, about 40 seconds: connect differences to the group’s needs. Acknowledge a trade-off without abandoning your recommendation.
5. Ending, about 10 seconds: repeat the decision briefly and invite agreement.

Keep the selection and preparation stages distinct when practising, even though all the text is visible here.

Original Task 5 practice prompt

Imagine the pictures and information cards show venues for your parents’ anniversary lunch in Kingston. Part 1: choose either the garden café (covered patio; near your parents’ home; set lunch menu) or the lakeside picnic area (open grass seating; a drive out of town; bring your own food). Part 2: your sister Leah prefers a boat lunch (open upper deck; departure from the harbour; buffet meal). Persuade Leah that your selected option is more suitable. Your father tires when standing, and your mother wants time to talk with everyone.

These fictional options each have three stated facts. The sample selects the garden café. Images and cards appear on the real test; the text here supports comparison practice.

Task 5 sample answer

Why this sample works

• Content/Coherence: the comparison follows the family’s needs: travel, shelter, comfort, and conversation. The recommendation has a clear practical basis.
• Vocabulary: “covered patio”, “set lunch”, and “buffet” connect the response to the information cards.
• Listenability: “whereas” makes a direct contrast, and the conditional language avoids awkward or absolute claims about unknown arrangements.
• Task Fulfillment: the speaker addresses Leah, acknowledges her preference, and argues for the selected café over the boat.

The sample proposes asking about seating and service instead of inventing venue facilities. Its claims about possible standing remain cautious because the card only specifies a buffet.

Common CELPIP Speaking Task 5 mistakes

• Using the silent selection stage to rehearse a speech before seeing the other person’s proposal.
• Comparing only the two original options and ignoring the new alternative in Part 2.
• Listing the card facts without explaining their effect on the family.
• Inventing prices, accessibility features, or travel times that the cards do not provide.
• Dismissing the sister’s idea rudely instead of making a considerate argument.
• Changing your selected option halfway through the response and leaving the recommendation unclear.

Review every comparative claim against the exercise. Separate a stated fact from an assumption, and use conditional wording when you discuss an uncertain consequence.

How to review your timed response

Try the prompt before reading the sample, then listen to your own recording without following a transcript. Mark the point where your meaning becomes difficult to follow. Was the problem an unfinished idea, an unclear reference, a long pause, or a sentence that became too complicated? Choose one issue to work on in your next attempt.

Then check the transcript for relevance and useful detail. A readable transcript cannot establish how your pronunciation sounded. CLB Mock, the app CELPIP Practice Test: AI Score by Certloom Learning, gives an estimated CELPIP level (≈CLB) range from a transcript and timing metrics. Listenability, including pronunciation, is only estimated from fluency metrics. Use that feedback alongside listening to your recording.

Choose your next speaking exercise

Practise another considerate conversation in Task 6: dealing with a difficult situation. Revisit Task 4 for practice explaining conclusions from supplied clues.

Want more examples first? See Task 5 questions with sample answers, or plan with the speaking templates.

Use the speaking overview to compare all eight tasks, and the score chart to understand the level scale. Read how AI scoring estimates work before interpreting app feedback. This is an unofficial practice guide with original exercises and samples. Its sample band is our teaching estimate, not a test result. Keep the useful structure, then change the details and wording so your next response is your own.