CELPIP Writing Task 2: The Survey Response Formula
CELPIP Writing Task 2 hands you a survey question, two options, and ~26 minutes — and most people respond by writing about both options equally, or listing five reasons with no explanations. Both cap at 7. This post gives you the formula that scores 9: pick a side fast, develop 2–3 reasons with explanations and concrete examples, nod at the other option once, restate. Plus a full worked example at band 9, scored against the actual criteria.
If you want to see how your own survey responses score before practicing the formula, take a free mock test → celpipuni.com/free-mock-test.
TL;DR
CELPIP Writing Task 2 asks you to respond to a survey: pick one of two options and justify your choice in ~26 minutes, recommended 150–200 words. The formula: state your choice → develop 2–3 reasons (each = reason + explanation + concrete example) → acknowledge the other option once → restate. Register is semi-formal. The biggest mistakes: sitting on the fence and listing five undeveloped reasons.
What Task 2 actually asks for
A survey presents a question and two options — the city has funding for either a new park or a new parking lot; a store is deciding whether to extend hours; a community centre will add either a library room or a sports hall. Your "response" is a written submission to whoever runs the survey.
Three things people miss about this task:
It's a survey, not an essay. There's no "discuss both views and give your opinion" instruction like IELTS. The survey wants a decision with reasons. Task fulfillment literally means picking — the fence is not a place to sit.
The register is semi-formal. You're one citizen writing to an organization. More formal than a text to a friend, less formal than a cover letter. "I'd strongly support the park option" — not "Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing to express my heartfelt opinion," and not "honestly parking lots are way better lol."
Development is the whole game. Both tasks recommend 150–200 words. In Task 1, structure carries you. In Task 2, there's no skeleton to hide behind — what's scored is whether each reason gets explained and grounded in an example. That's why Task 2 separates the 7s from the 9s, and why under-practicing it costs people a band.
The formula, step by step
Step 1 — state your choice (1–2 sentences, in the first 20 seconds of writing). "I'd choose the park, and it's not particularly close." Direct, unambiguous. Some test-takers agonize over which side; pick the side you can generate two examples for in 30 seconds — that's the only selection criterion that matters. There's no "correct" answer; raters score the justification.
Step 2 — reason 1: reason + explanation + example (3–4 sentences). The reason is the claim. The explanation is why it holds. The example makes it visible. "The neighbourhood's full of young families [reason]. Kids within walking distance currently have nowhere safe to play after school [explanation]. On my street alone there are at least a dozen children who play in a shared parking court — cars reversing included — because there's nothing else [example]."
Step 3 — reason 2, same anatomy (3–4 sentences). A different angle, not a re-skin. If reason 1 was about kids, reason 2 could be about property values, health, community events — anything that isn't "also, kids like parks."
Step 4 — reason 3, optional (2–3 sentences). Only if it's genuinely developed. Two developed reasons beat two developed ones plus a dangling "thirdly" — an undeveloped third reason reads as padding.
Step 5 — the concession (1–2 sentences). One honest nod to the other option: "Parking is a real problem here too — Saturday mornings on this street are chaos." Then the pivot: "But a parking lot solves it for drivers while a park serves nearly everyone, including the drivers on the days they walk." One concession shows judgment; two concessions look like fence-sitting.
Step 6 — restate (1 sentence). "For those reasons, I'd spend the funding on the park." The equivalent of signing your name to the choice.
Total: ~170–200 words, 4 short paragraphs. Planning time: 3–4 minutes, spent generating your reasons and the one example each before writing a word.
The numbers: how 26 minutes splits
| Phase | Minutes | What you're doing |
|---|---|---|
| Read + decide | 2–3 | Pick the side you can example for, not the side you believe in |
| Plan reasons | 1–2 | Two reasons + a concrete example each, scribbled |
| Write | 16–18 | The six-step formula |
| Edit | 3–4 | The errors you know you make — articles, tense, the "secondly" habit |
And the criteria the rater holds, same four dimensions across CELPIP Writing:
| Criterion | What 9 looks like in Task 2 |
|---|---|
| Content/coherence | 2–3 reasons, each explained and grounded; a clear thread from choice to close |
| Vocabulary | Precise, varied, natural — "walkable," "chaos," not "very good thing" |
| Readability | Paragraphs, varied sentence lengths, flow between reasons |
| Task fulfillment | A clear choice, justified, addressed to the survey — no fence, right register |
Timings and word-count guidance get revised periodically — confirm current numbers on the official CELPIP site.
The three mistakes that cap Task 2 at 7
Sitting on the fence. "Both options have merit. The park is nice but parking is also important. I think a balanced approach would be best." The survey asked you to choose. An unmade choice is a task-fulfillment hole, and the most common reason we see strong writers score 7 on Task 2.
Five reasons, zero development. "Firstly, parks are healthy. Secondly, parks are green. Thirdly, families like parks. Fourthly, property values. Fifthly, fresh air." A list of claims with no explanations — content/coherence caps at 6–7 no matter how clean the grammar is. Two reasons, each with a "because" and a "for example," outscore five bare claims every time.
Wrong register. A text to a friend ("ok so honestly the parking lot wins, no question") or a formal petition ("I hereby submit for the esteemed council's consideration…"). Semi-formal means contractions are fine, slang isn't, and "Dear Sir/Madam" isn't.
A full worked example at band 9
Prompt: your city has funding to build either a new neighbourhood park or a new parking lot. Respond to the survey choosing one option and justifying your choice.
I'd choose the park, and honestly, it's not close.
The main reason is who this neighbourhood actually is: young families, on nearly every block. There's no green space within a 15-minute walk right now, so kids end up playing in the shared parking court on my street — with cars reversing through it — because there's nowhere else to go. A park gives them that somewhere, and gives their parents 20 minutes of not worrying.
It's also the option that keeps paying back. A parking lot is full at peak and useless the other 18 hours of the day; a park is used from morning dog-walkers to evening soccer to the weekend families who'd otherwise drive to the next suburb's playground. The same land works harder.
Parking here is genuinely miserable — Saturday mornings on Main Street are proof, and I say that as someone who circles for ten minutes like everyone else. But the parking problem touches drivers, while the park serves nearly everyone, including drivers on the days they walk.
For those reasons, I'd spend the funding on the park.
Why this scores 9: content — two reasons, each with explanation and a specific image, plus one honest concession. Vocabulary — "miserable," "circles for ten minutes," "the same land works harder": natural, precise, not fancy. Readability — four short paragraphs, sentence lengths from 6 to 25 words, transitions that carry logic instead of announcing it. Task fulfillment — a clear choice in sentence one, addressed to the survey, semi-formal throughout. About 200 words.
Notice what isn't there: "Firstly, secondly, thirdly." The reasons connect through meaning, not scaffolding.
Want your own survey response marked against this rubric? Get a detailed evaluation with band-level feedback → celpipuni.com/evaluation.
Your Task 2 checklist
- Choice stated in the first two sentences — always
- 2–3 reasons, each with explanation + concrete example
- Reasons generated before writing — 3–4 minutes of planning, no skipping
- Exactly one concession, then a pivot back
- "Firstly/secondly/thirdly" banned — connect through meaning
- Restate at the end
- 150–200 words typed in 26 minutes, including 3–4 minutes of editing
The nuance nobody mentions
Here's the observation from our grading desk that surprises people: pick the side you can example, not the side you believe. Test-takers lose minutes picking the "true" answer, then can't generate two developed reasons for it. The rater never sees your values — only your writing. If you genuinely love parks but your life gives you three parking examples in 30 seconds, write the parking lot. A 9 for the option you don't prefer beats a 7 for the one you do. Every time.
Tools and resources
- The official CELPIP site — free Task 2 sample prompts and the current format. Practice against real prompt phrasing. (Confirm current task structure there — it gets revised.)
- Free mock test — instant section scores so you can see where Task 2 sits today: celpipuni.com/free-mock-test
- Human evaluation — band-level feedback on your survey responses specifically: celpipuni.com/evaluation
- Sample comparison — a full 7 vs 9 on the same Task 2 prompt, annotated line by line: CELPIP writing samples with scores
Frequently asked questions
How long is Task 2 in CELPIP Writing?
About 26 minutes, recommended 150–200 words. Budget 3–4 minutes planning, 16–18 writing, 3–4 editing. Timings get revised — confirm current numbers on the official CELPIP site.
Do I have to pick one option?
Yes — the survey asks you to choose and justify. Sitting on the fence is the most common task-fulfillment error on this task and caps the score regardless of language quality.
How many reasons should I give?
Two developed reasons (reason + explanation + example each) is the sweet spot. Three only if the third is genuinely developed. Five undeveloped reasons score lower than two developed ones — development density is what's scored.
Can I use "firstly, secondly" in Task 2?
You can, and it won't automatically cost you — but it reads as formulaic and wastes words. Connect reasons through meaning ("The main reason… It's also…") and your coherence score thanks you.
What if I finish early?
Edit. Use the full 26 minutes — check articles, verb tenses, and the sentences you wrote fastest, because those hold your errors. Then check word count: under about 150 usually means underdeveloped reasons.
What register is right for Task 2?
Semi-formal. Contractions are fine ("I'd," "there's"), slang isn't, and "Dear Sir or Madam" is too heavy. You're one person writing to an organization running a survey.
Is Task 2 the same as the IELTS opinion essay?
No. It's shorter (150–200 words vs 250+), forces a choice between two given options, and is addressed to a survey context. No "discuss both views" — see CELPIP vs IELTS Writing.
What to do next
- Today: write one survey response with the formula, timed, 26 minutes. Any either/or question — pick in 60 seconds.
- Check it: choice in sentence one? Every reason has an example? One concession only?
- Tomorrow: same prompt, opposite side — practice generating for a side you wouldn't naturally pick.
- This week: get one evaluation to see whether your development density reads 7 or 9.
Related reading
- CELPIP Writing: The Complete Guide to a 9+ (2026)
- CELPIP Writing Samples With Scores: 7 vs 9 Side by Side
- CELPIP Writing Word Count: What's Optimal (150–200 Isn't a Law)
- CELPIP vs IELTS Writing: What Each Test Actually Asks For
The bottom line
Task 2 isn't an essay to impress — it's a decision to justify. Pick in the first minute, the side you can example for. Develop two reasons with explanations and concrete images. Concede once, honestly. Restate. That formula, practiced ten times under the clock, is the difference between "surveys are my weak task" and a 9.
Ready to find out if your survey responses read 7 or 9? Get a detailed evaluation with band-level feedback → Get your Task 2 evaluated.