CELPIP Speaking Task 7: Expressing Opinions

CELPIP Speaking Task 7 Sample Answer: Solar Panels on New Buildings

This prompt asks whether all new homes and buildings should be required to have solar panels. The tricky part is that a simple yes ignores real Canadian limits like short winter days and housing costs, so a strong answer needs nuance.

Preparation

30 seconds

Speaking

90 seconds

Structure

Opinion, reasons, conclusion

The question

Answer the following question.

Question: Do you think all new homes and buildings should be required to have solar panels? Explain your reasons.

How to plan your answer

What they want

Give your opinion: should all new homes and buildings be required to have solar panels? Explain why.

Plan (90 sec)

State your side clearly, e.g. "Yes, I think new buildings should have solar panels."
Reason 1: environment; clean energy reduces emissions for decades.
Reason 2: lower bills; owners save money every month, which pays back the cost.
Reason 3: it's cheapest to install during construction, not later.
Brief nod to the other side: homes get more expensive, and some places get little sun in winter, so offer rebates and exceptions.
Close by restating your opinion.

Useful vocabulary

solar panels, renewable energy, emissions, electricity bill
upfront cost, pay for itself, rebate, building code

Phrases

"In my opinion,..."
"The main reason I feel this way is..."
"For example, my neighbour..."
"Some people might argue..., but..."

Avoid

Sitting on the fence; pick one side and stay with it.
Only general statements; give a realistic example.

Excellent answer (transcript): around CLB 11–12

I'd support requiring solar panels on most new homes and buildings, as long as the rule is flexible enough to account for location and cost. The strongest argument is that buildings are one of the biggest sources of energy use, and new construction is the easiest place to make a change. It's far cheaper to design a roof for solar from the start than to retrofit it twenty years later. It also makes financial sense for homeowners over time. A neighbour of mine in Calgary put panels on his house a few years ago, and he expects them to pay for themselves in about ten years. That said, a one-size-fits-all rule wouldn't work. A building shaded by tall towers, or a home in northern Canada with only a few hours of winter daylight, wouldn't get much benefit. And with housing already so expensive, adding thousands of dollars to the price of a new home is a real concern. So I'd pair the requirement with rebates and clear exemptions, which would make it both effective and fair.

176 words

Why it scores high

Content/Coherence: The opening signals a balanced position, each paragraph builds on it, and "both effective and fair" ties the argument together at the end.
Vocabulary: Precise words such as "retrofit," "a one-size-fits-all rule" and "clear exemptions" show sophisticated, topic-appropriate range.
Task Fulfillment: Specific support, panels that "pay for themselves in about ten years" and homes in northern Canada with "a few hours of winter daylight," grounds every claim.

Good answer (transcript): around CLB 7–8

In my opinion, it's a good idea to require solar panels on new homes and buildings, but with some exceptions. First, it helps the environment. Buildings use a lot of energy, and solar power is clean and renewable. If every new building produces some of its own electricity, it makes a big difference. Second, it saves money in the long term. My friend in Calgary installed solar panels three years ago, and now his electricity bill in the summer is almost zero. Also, it's much cheaper to install them when you build a house than to add them later. However, some buildings are in the shade, or in places with very little sun in winter. So I think there should be exceptions for those cases, and the government should offer rebates so houses don't become even more expensive.

138 words

What works, and what's missing

Content/Coherence: A clear thesis, "a good idea ... but with some exceptions," is supported by environmental and cost reasons and closed with matching exceptions.
Vocabulary: Terms like "clean and renewable," "in the long term" and "rebates" fit the topic and show good topic-specific range.
Task Fulfillment: The friend's near-zero summer bill helps, but the answer never explains why a requirement beats letting buyers choose, which keeps it from the top.

Basic answer (transcript): around CLB 4–5

I think yes, new homes and building should have solar panels. First, solar energy is clean. It's good for environment and we can reduce pollution. Second, people can save money on electricity bill. My uncle have solar panel on his house and his bill is very small now. But the solar panel is expensive, so new house will be more expensive. The government should help with money. Also some place in Canada don't have many sun in winter. But I still think it is good idea.

86 words

What holds it back

Content/Coherence: The uncle's small bill is a good example, but the cost and winter-sun problems are tacked on without linking them back to the opinion.
Vocabulary: Errors like "My uncle have solar panel" and "don't have many sun" show agreement and count-noun problems in the key examples.
Task Fulfillment: "But I still think it is good idea" restates the view without weighing the problems just raised, beyond a quick line that the government should help.

These are original CELPass examples written at each level. The CLBs are our estimates, not official CELPIP scores. How we estimate CLB