CELPIP Writing Task 2: Responding to Survey Questions

CELPIP Writing Task 2 Sample Answer: Streetlight dimming survey

The city asks whether to dim streetlights after midnight to save money or keep them bright all night. The difficulty is acknowledging that $300,000 is a real saving while still arguing convincingly for your side.

Time

26 minutes

Length

150–200 words

Structure

Choose Option A or B and support it

The question

Streetlight Survey

Your city wants to save money and energy on its streetlights. One option is to dim all streetlights by half between midnight and 5:00 a.m., which would save about $300,000 a year. The other option is to keep the lights at full brightness all night and look for savings in other areas. The city is asking residents to complete an opinion survey.

Choose the option that you prefer. Why do you prefer your choice? Explain the reasons for your choice. Write about 150-200 words.

Option A: I think streetlights should be dimmed after midnight.

Option B: I think streetlights should stay at full brightness all night.

Explain the reasons for your choice. Write about 150-200 words.

How to plan your answer

What they want

Choose whether streetlights should be dimmed by half after midnight (A) or stay at full brightness all night (B).

Plan (26 min)

State your choice. Option A is easier to argue: $300,000 a year is a large, concrete saving.
Reason 1: the money could fund snow clearing, parks or library hours instead of lighting empty streets.
Reason 2: dimmer lights cut energy use and light pollution, helping sleep and letting people see the stars. Example: a bright light shining into your bedroom.
Optional nod: some worry about safety, but few people are out between midnight and 5:00 a.m., and lights stay on at half power.
Conclusion: restate your choice and main benefit.

Useful vocabulary

streetlights, dim, light pollution, energy savings
taxpayers' money, overnight, visibility, public safety

Phrases

I believe the city should dim... because...
Saving $300,000 a year would allow...
Although some residents may feel less safe, ...

Avoid

Choosing both options.
Ignoring safety concerns completely; answer them briefly.

Excellent answer: around CLB 11–12

I believe the streetlights should stay at full brightness all night, so I would choose Option B. My main concern is the safety of people who are out after midnight. Our city is not empty at 2:00 a.m.: nurses, cleaners, taxi drivers and restaurant staff all travel home at those hours, often on foot or by bus. Halving the light on their routes would leave many of them feeling exposed, and well-lit streets are widely recognized as a deterrent to break-ins and vandalism. Road safety is another issue. For much of the year, our nights are long and the roads are slick with ice and snow. Drivers already struggle to spot pedestrians in dark winter clothing, and dimmer streets would only shorten their reaction time. I certainly appreciate that $300,000 a year is a substantial saving, and reducing energy use is a worthy goal. However, the city could achieve similar results by accelerating the switch to LED fixtures or trimming less essential spending, without asking residents to compromise their safety. In short, saving money matters, but not at the expense of people getting home safely.

185 words

Why it scores high

Content/Coherence: 'Our city is not empty at 2:00 a.m.' followed by 'nurses, cleaners, taxi drivers and restaurant staff' makes the argument vivid.
Vocabulary: 'a deterrent to break-ins and vandalism' and 'shorten their reaction time' use precise, natural expressions suited to a formal survey.
Task Fulfillment: calling the saving 'substantial' and the goal 'worthy' before proposing 'accelerating the switch to LED fixtures' handles the counter-argument skilfully.

Good answer: around CLB 7–8

I think streetlights should stay at full brightness all night, so I prefer Option B. My first reason is personal safety. Many people are still outside after midnight, such as shift workers, students and people coming home from late events. For example, my sister is a nurse who often walks home from the bus stop at 1:00 a.m. Dark streets make people feel unsafe, and they can also make it easier for criminals to break into cars or homes without being seen. Secondly, good lighting is important for road safety. In winter, the roads are often icy and snowy, and drivers need to see pedestrians and cyclists clearly. Reducing the light by half could lead to more accidents, which would also cost the city money. I understand that saving $300,000 a year is attractive, and saving energy is good for the environment. However, the city could find savings in other ways, such as switching to more efficient LED bulbs or reducing spending on less essential projects. In my opinion, the safety of residents should always come first, so keeping the lights bright is the right decision.

186 words

What works, and what's missing

Content/Coherence: the sister who is 'a nurse who often walks home from the bus stop at 1:00 a.m.' gives a clear, specific reason for full lighting.
Task Fulfillment: saying that accidents 'would also cost the city money' cleverly turns the city's own budget argument against Option A.
Vocabulary: alternatives like 'more efficient LED bulbs' are good, but phrasing such as 'make people feel unsafe' stays general rather than precise.

Basic answer: around CLB 4–5

I think Option B is better. The streetlights should stay full bright all night. First, safety is very important. Many people work at night and go home after midnight. I work in a restaurant and I finish at 1 a.m. I walk to the bus stop and the street is already a little dark. If the lights is dimmer, I will feel scared. Also, more dark street can have more crime. Second, the drivers need good light to see the people who walk or ride bike. In winter in Canada the night is long and there is snow and ice. With less light, there will be more accident. $300,000 is a lot of money, but I think the city can save money in other way, for example use LED lights or cut some other things. People safety is more important than money. So I choose Option B.

147 words

What holds it back

Readability: 'If the lights is dimmer', 'more dark street' and 'there will be more accident' contain agreement and comparison errors in the main arguments.
Vocabulary: 'stay full bright all night' and 'People safety is more important than money' show word-form problems that blur meaning.
Content/Coherence: the restaurant shift ending at '1 a.m.' is a strong example, but the crime point is only one short line.

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