Start free
CELPIP Listening Part 5: Listening to a Discussion

CELPIP Listening Part 5 Practice Test: Henderson Deadline Dispute Discussion

By Iris

A free Listening Part 5 practice test in the CELPIP format: 8 questions with the answer key. Play each recording once, as in the real test, answer, then check your answers at the bottom of the page. The transcript is under each recording.

Questions
8
Format
1 video, questions after it
Question style
Multiple choice, 4 options
Play like the real test
Each recording plays once, then each question with 30 seconds to answer (Parts 4–6: one timer for the part). No pausing to replay, like test day.

  1. What are Yuki, Daniel, and Aisha discussing?

  2. What concern does Aisha raise first?

  3. What advantage does Daniel's tracking system offer?

  4. What value does the group prioritize most?

  5. What compromise does Yuki propose?

  6. Who will sketch the tracking template?

  7. What is Daniel's final warning?

  8. How are the final tasks distributed?

Transcript (read it after you answer)

woman1: So, Daniel, what actually happened with the Henderson deadline? The client email this morning was pointed.

man1: Honestly, Yuki, the spec was ambiguous from day one. We kept second-guessing what was in scope.

woman2: That's fair, Daniel, but I'd argue we underestimated the workload regardless of how clear the spec was.

woman1: Aisha, the workload only became visible because the instructions were vague. The two issues are tangled, frankly.

man1: Yuki's right that they compound. What I'd push for is a tracking system that flags scope creep early.

woman2: A tracking system is fine, although it doesn't fix the cultural issue of nobody flagging concerns until week four.

woman1: That's the part I keep returning to. Silence from the team is what turned a small slip into a missed delivery.

man1: Granted, although I'd note that overtime expectations made people reluctant to raise problems openly.

woman2: Daniel, that's a valid angle, but let's not blame culture for what was a planning miss on our end.

woman1: We can hold both. Better tracking would surface workload, provided we agreed concerns must be voiced weekly, not monthly.

man1: Weekly check-ins would have caught this, although they only work if leads actually act on what gets raised.

woman2: That's the accountability piece. A flagged concern with no follow-up is worse than no flag at all.

woman1: Agreed. The client question still stands, though. Do we apologize, or offer a revised timeline immediately?

man1: Both, ideally. Apology first, then a credible timeline, otherwise we look defensive instead of accountable.

woman2: I'll write up the client note this afternoon. Yuki, could you sketch the weekly tracking template before Thursday?

woman1: Sure. Daniel, will you raise the silence issue gently with the team lead?

0 of 8 answered

This is Part 5 of CELPIP Listening Practice Test 43. Take all 6 parts (38 questions) for a score and an estimated CLB.

Answer key

Show all 8 answers
  1. What are Yuki, Daniel, and Aisha discussing? A. Explaining the late Henderson project
  2. What concern does Aisha raise first? C. Workload was underestimated regardless of clarity
  3. What advantage does Daniel's tracking system offer? B. It exposes expanding requirements sooner
  4. What value does the group prioritize most? A. Accountability requires concern follow-through
  5. What compromise does Yuki propose? C. Track dual causes before weekly review
  6. Who will sketch the tracking template? B. Yuki, before Thursday
  7. What is Daniel's final warning? A. Appearing evasive despite responsible intent
  8. How are the final tasks distributed? D. Two accept; Daniel receives a request

More Part 5 sample tests

All 48 Part 5 sample tests · Part 5 format, tips and FAQs · Full-length Listening practice tests · Free CELPIP practice test

CELPass is an independent practice platform and is not affiliated with Paragon Testing Enterprises. CELPIP is a trademark of Paragon Testing Enterprises. Check the official CELPIP website and IRCC for current test rules and requirements.