CELPIP Speaking Task 7 questions with sample answers

Sample answer (210 words, sized for 90 seconds). Our estimate: around CLB 10, with clear delivery.

I think unfinished pieces would add something valuable, as long as they're presented with the artists' permission. A polished painting can be impressive, but it doesn't reveal all the decisions that led to the final result. Seeing an early sketch beside a developing canvas would help visitors understand that process. It could also make creative work feel more approachable. Beginners sometimes assume skilled artists get everything right immediately. If they see revised outlines or abandoned colour combinations, they may realize that experimentation is part of learning. My friend Luc nearly gave up drawing because his first attempts looked awkward, so that message could be encouraging. Another advantage is the conversation it could spark. Visitors could ask why an artist changed the composition or left a particular area unresolved. That's more engaging than simply deciding whether they like the finished image. Still, the exhibition needs to feel intentional. Randomly displaying incomplete work without context could leave people confused or make artists feel exposed. I'd invite a small number of volunteers to provide a brief explanation and place those pieces in a clearly marked section. Finished work should remain a substantial part of the show. Done thoughtfully, this addition would celebrate both artistic achievement and the patient work that happens before it.

Sample answer (199 words, sized for 90 seconds). Our estimate: around CLB 10, with clear delivery.

I'd support a quiet hour on Tuesday mornings because it would give everyone a predictable chance to concentrate. In a small office, even a friendly conversation can interrupt someone who's checking figures or drafting a proposal. Having that protected time would make it easier to finish those jobs accurately. For example, my colleague Priya could review the weekly invoices from nine until ten without having to start over after every interruption. Another benefit is that people could plan around it. If everyone knows the arrangement, they can save routine questions for later or send a message that doesn't require an immediate reply. That seems more considerate than expecting each employee to keep asking for silence. Finally, an hour is a modest commitment. The office would still have almost the entire day available for teamwork, so nobody would lose regular contact with colleagues. Of course, urgent calls from customers would need an exception, and the receptionist shouldn't be left handling everything alone. I'd rotate responsibility for those calls so the benefit is shared fairly. After a month, the manager could ask whether staff are actually getting more done. Overall, I think this is a practical experiment with very little downside.

Sample answer (206 words, sized for 90 seconds). Our estimate: around CLB 10, with clear delivery.

I'd choose the smaller performances because they'd give visitors more ways to enjoy the celebration at their own pace. One large show tends to create a single crowded focal point. With several short performances, people could move between spaces, take breaks, and still feel they've experienced the event. The format would also give a wider range of performers a chance. A quiet storytelling act might struggle on a huge stage, whereas a small seating area could suit it perfectly. My friend Jun plays acoustic guitar, and an intimate setting would let the audience actually hear the details of his music. Another advantage is resilience. If one performer is delayed, the entire afternoon wouldn't grind to a halt. Organizers could direct visitors to another activity while sorting things out. Admittedly, several locations require careful coordination. Sound could overlap, and visitors might miss an act if the schedule isn't obvious. I'd keep the performance areas close together, avoid putting loud acts beside quiet ones, and display a simple timetable at each entrance. There should also be accessible seating at every location. A headline show has its appeal, but I think a varied afternoon would create a more relaxed, welcoming celebration and give people better reasons to stay longer.

Sample answer (210 words, sized for 90 seconds). Our estimate: around CLB 10, with clear delivery.

I'd allow software to organize applications, but I wouldn't let it reject candidates without a person checking the decision. A large employer needs an efficient process, yet efficiency has little value if suitable people disappear before anyone considers them. Applications rarely express experience in identical language. Someone who supervised a small volunteer team might have relevant skills without using the exact phrases found in the job advertisement. A rigid filter could overlook that evidence. Automated rejection also makes mistakes harder to question. If applicants receive a generic message, they may never learn whether the problem was their qualifications or how their document was read. Human review offers an opportunity to notice those errors. I recognize the strongest argument for screening software: reading hundreds of applications takes time and can involve human bias too. My suggestion wouldn't be to pretend that people make perfect decisions. Instead, the employer should define a few essential requirements, have software highlight evidence, and ask trained reviewers to assess uncertain cases and proposed rejections. It could compare results across different application formats before expanding the system. Applicants should also have a clear route for reporting a processing error. Hiring deserves useful technology, but someone within the company should remain accountable for excluding a person from consideration.

Sample answer (208 words, sized for 90 seconds). Our estimate: around CLB 10, with clear delivery.

I'd enjoy taking turns choosing unfamiliar music during weekend chores, as long as everyone could ask for something to be changed. Cleaning the kitchen is fairly repetitive, and a different soundtrack could make it feel less tedious. The arrangement would give household members a simple way to share their interests. Someone who rarely talks about music might introduce a style the others would never discover on their own. It could also stop one person's preferences from becoming the permanent background to family life. Taking turns is an easy way to spread that choice around. I like the idea of unfamiliar music in particular because it encourages curiosity rather than arguments about whose favourite songs are best. Still, chores shouldn't become an enforced listening lesson. A person with a headache, or someone concentrating on a delicate task, might prefer silence. Volume should remain low enough for ordinary conversation, and anyone should be able to object without defending their taste. In my household, I'd try one short selection each weekend rather than a whole afternoon chosen by one person. We could talk afterwards about anything we liked. The point would be discovering something together while getting the work done, not testing everyone's patience with the longest or strangest recording available.

Comparison answer (161 words). Our estimate: around CLB 7.

Yes, I think the club should show some unfinished art. It would be very good because people usually see a picture when it is ready. They could see something different this time and learn how an artist starts working.

For example, imagine a visitor who wants to paint but does not know where to begin. A half-finished picture could give them an idea. They can look at the lines and colours. I think this would be very good for young people too, because they can see that a picture takes time.

Also, there would be more things to talk about at the exhibition. Visitors could ask the artist some question about what they will do next. The artist could explain their plan. Some visitors might prefer finished work, so the club should keep those pictures as well. The artists needs to agree before their work is shown. I think a small area for unfinished pictures would make the exhibition more interesting.