Start free
CELPIP Reading Part 4: Reading for Viewpoints

CELPIP Reading Part 4 Practice Test: A Calendar Cannot

By Iris

A free Reading Part 4 practice test in the CELPIP format: 10 questions with the answer key. Choose your answers, then check them at the bottom of the page.

Questions
10
Time
about 13 minutes
Question style
Multiple choice and drop-down completion

Maple County proposes requiring schools and hospitals to direct at least half of each week’s produce spending to suppliers within the province. The target sounds precise, but it treats agricultural supply as though it were constant across months and institutions. School terms overlap with the main harvest; hospitals serve meals every day and cannot postpone a therapeutic menu until a crop becomes available. The policy’s percentage therefore conceals a question of timing. Dietitian Sofia Markovic sees educational and nutritional value in seasonal rotation, particularly when students taste unfamiliar vegetables more than once. Still, she rejects the idea that winter produce is inferior by definition. Promptly frozen food can support excellent diets, while local food stored beyond its useful life can increase waste.

Government analyst Daniel Wu adds that measuring the target by spending invites buyers to satisfy it with a few expensive local items rather than meaningful volume.

Farmer Owen Baptiste supports a long contract built around seasonal capacity, not a weekly quota. If buyers commit before planting, his cooperative can expand greenhouse greens, store roots, and freeze berries at harvest. He also wants crop-equivalence clauses: when disease damages broccoli, the cooperative could provide cabbage with similar menu uses rather than lose the contract. Flexibility, he argues, shares biological risk instead of pretending it has disappeared.

Procurement manager Leah Moss worries that substitution is not equally simple everywhere. A school soup can change with little notice, whereas a hospital must preserve nutrient profiles, texture-modified diets, allergen controls, and reliable volumes. A rigid target could force expensive emergency purchases from the very national distributors it is meant to replace. Moss is not opposed to regional supply; she is opposed to counting a backup as policy failure.

A workable policy would separate an annual capacity goal from clinical continuity. Multi-year bids could contain seasonal bands, approved nutritional substitutions, preserved products, and neutral backup provisions. Results should be reported in edible kilograms as well as dollars, with waste and emergency purchases disclosed. Such a design would enlarge regional supply over time without asking either weather or patient needs to obey a political percentage each week.

  1. What is the article’s central objection to the target?

  2. Baptiste and Moss both accept that

  3. The target Wu criticizes fails because

  4. Markovic’s view strengthens Baptiste’s proposal to

  5. An emergency distributor purchase would be

The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.

I review hospital menus and would replace the weekly percentage with seasonal bands. That change would make the target respond to rather than making every month imitate harvest season. Baptiste’s equivalence clause could then share production risk if the substitute preserves . Modest for a school soup, demanding for a renal or allergen-controlled menu, Moss’s backup supplier then functions as , not evidence that the regional strategy failed. Markovic’s frozen-food example also shows preservation can seasonal capacity, not contradict it. Freezing berries at harvest moves supply into winter without proving stored food is superior. Wu’s objection shows why the annual result needs , since a dollar share can rise while food volume falls. A credible report shows expenditure, kilograms, waste, and emergency orders together. Only that fuller picture tells hospitals whether the target is serving patients or just the ledger.

0 of 10 answered

This is Part 4 of CELPIP Reading Practice Test 52. Take all 4 parts (38 questions) for a score and an estimated CLB.

Answer key

Show all 10 answers
  1. What is the article’s central objection to the target? B. It assumes constant supply
  2. Baptiste and Moss both accept that D. contingency fits within regional goals
  3. The target Wu criticizes fails because C. it can rise through pricey items alone
  4. Markovic’s view strengthens Baptiste’s proposal to B. extend capacity through processing
  5. An emergency distributor purchase would be A. reported as continuity, not cancellation
  6. A. the biological supply cycle
  7. D. the relevant clinical properties
  8. B. continuity insurance
  9. A. extend
  10. D. a volume-based measure

More Part 4 sample tests

All 152 Part 4 sample tests · Part 4 format, tips and FAQs · Full-length Reading 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.