CELPIP Speaking Tasks 5 and 6: Explain a Choice and Handle Disagreement

Task 5: make the comparison that is actually required

Task 5 asks you to compare options and persuade another person. It has two preparation stages. First, a situation and two options appear; you choose one without speaking. You have a minute for that selection stage. A new option then appears as the other person's suggestion, followed by another minute to prepare the comparison.

The speaking response compares the option you selected with the new suggestion. It does not compare the two original choices. Make a selection rather than leaving it to the computer. Once an option is selected, use the remaining first-stage time to understand its features and possible benefits instead of continuing to examine the rejected choice.

A familiar option may be easier to explain because its vocabulary and advantages are more accessible. The aim is a clear, supported preference. During the second stage, the new suggestion gives the comparison its specific direction.

Persuasion connects a feature with the needs of the people making the decision.

Worked question: choosing a staff lunch

You and a co-worker are arranging lunch for a company event. The first choices are a fine-dining restaurant and a buffet:

The model selects the buffet. Alex then suggests a food truck costing about $5 per person. It mainly offers hot dogs, can serve large groups and provides casual street seating with little protection from rain or wind.

The response therefore compares the buffet with the food truck and tries to persuade Alex that the buffet is more suitable for the staff lunch.

Complete model answer

Hi Alex, I can see why the food truck appeals to you, especially at about five dollars per person. However, I think the buffet would be a better choice for our staff lunch. First, the buffet offers a wider variety of food. Our colleagues have different tastes, so several choices would make it easier for everyone to find something they enjoy. The food truck mainly serves hot dogs, which gives us fewer alternatives. Another advantage is the seating. The buffet has plenty of room for a large group, so we can eat together and talk. With street seating, we'd also be exposed if it became windy or rainy. I know the buffet can be noisy, so we could ask about a quieter area. We also need to check its price before booking. Shall we contact the restaurant and find out?

The opening acknowledges a real advantage of Alex's suggestion: its low price. The first reason then connects food variety with colleagues' different tastes. The second connects group seating with eating and talking together. A possible weather problem develops the comparison with street seating. The answer also acknowledges the buffet's noise and suggests asking about a quieter area. Finally, this version chooses to ask about the missing price before booking.

Turn a feature into a reason

Reading features aloud is not yet persuasion. “The buffet has a wide variety of food” states information. Explaining that colleagues have different tastes shows why the information matters for this lunch. “It has group seating” becomes a reason when the response connects seating with eating together and talking.

There are two useful directions for comparison. One emphasizes an advantage of the preferred option. The other identifies a limitation of the alternative and explains how the preferred option addresses it. Both need a clear relationship to the situation.

The 3-1 Principle, or Three Ones Principle, provides a starting point: a point, an explanation and an example or relevant supporting detail. Depending on how fully each reason is developed, one, two or three reasons may work. Try to touch on roughly three useful features of the options across the answer; this does not require three separate paragraphs. If the explanation is already clear and well organized, there is no need to force it into the framework. Use the structure when it helps prevent disconnected or unfinished ideas.

In the lunch model, food variety and seating are separate reasons. Mixing both into one unfinished sentence makes the argument harder to follow. Notes such as “variety—different tastes” and “seating—talk together” preserve both the feature and its significance.

Explain a consequence

“Outdoor seating could be uncomfortable” is a starting point. “If it became windy or rainy, we would have little shelter, and people might not enjoy eating together” explains the consequence. The added detail remains connected to the information supplied about weather protection. It is a possible situation, not a claim that bad weather is certain.

Relevant background can strengthen a reason. If the group wants time to talk, seating together matters. That connection should be stated rather than left for the listener to infer. Acknowledging a limitation can also show clear reasoning: the buffet may be noisy, so asking about a quieter section is a possible response to the problem.

Handle price precisely

When both prices are given, stating their difference can make a comparison concrete. A more expensive choice may still be suitable if the response explains what useful benefit the additional cost provides. “Expensive means better” is not enough.

In this question, the buffet price is not listed, so the supplied information alone does not establish a price difference. This model develops the known advantages and proposes checking the price. That is one workable direction, rather than a requirement to avoid all imagined background.

Reasonable added context can develop the supplied features. For example, comfortable seating becomes more persuasive if the people need two or three hours to discuss plans. A café that specializes in coffee and baked goods can be developed with plausible details about its beans or fresh pastries. Keep the fixed conditions of the prompt, but fill an unstated detail when it makes the scenario coherent and supports the reason. When uncertainty itself matters, say so: “They might charge extra for equipment” is a useful way to discuss an unlisted fee.

Affordable, a more affordable option and people can afford it offer alternatives to repeatedly using “cheap.” For a higher-priced choice, “I know it costs more, but the extra cost gives us…” should lead to an actual benefit. The argument depends on that benefit; higher price alone does not establish better quality.

Persuade in a tone that fits the relationship

The person being addressed determines the greeting and tone. “Your partner” means the speaker's own partner; “another parent” means a conversation between parents. Here, Alex is a co-worker involved in a shared decision.

A friendly opening acknowledges the alternative before stating a preference:

While I think the food truck could be a good option, I think the buffet is better for this lunch.

Possible endings include “Do you see what I mean? I hope you can support my choice” and “See what I mean? I think we should choose the buffet.” A situation-specific ending can propose the next action, such as calling the restaurant together.

To invite an opinion, ask “What do you think?” rather than “How do you think?” The question asks for the person’s view, not for the process by which they think.

“I urge you to do this” is a strong request. It may fit a serious complaint or a need to put something right, but it can sound too forceful in a routine choice with a partner or colleague. A memorized phrase should not override the relationship. Acknowledgement, reasons and an invitation to consider the choice can persuade without sounding aggressive.

Transitions help the structure remain audible: “First of all,” “On top of that” and “Another advantage is” mark movement between reasons. Finish the explanation of one point before moving on. Returning repeatedly from price to food and back to price makes an answer feel disorganized even when the individual ideas are relevant.

Language that makes a comparison clear

Comparatives express differences: “This book is longer than that book.” A superlative identifies the highest degree within a group: “This is the longest book.” In a decision, phrases such as “more suitable,” “more comfortable” and “a better option” work only when the reason for the comparison is explained.

Paraphrasing expresses the same meaning another way. It can add variety, but some terms are already the clearest names for their subjects: “business meeting” and “field trip” need not be replaced with awkward alternatives. Vocabulary range can come through the explanations around them.

Accurate word choices make reasons more precise. An activity can be exciting, while a person feels excited about it. An ice-skating venue is a rink, whereas sports such as football use a field. A central concern can be stated as “Safety would be my number one concern” or “Safety would be my top priority,” followed by an explanation of its relevance. Mimic means to imitate an action or behaviour.

When a reason concerns a meaningful shared experience, a precious moment is a valued moment, and cherish means value deeply. “We can look back at the photographs and cherish those memories” shows both expressions in context. Our first encounter means the first time the people met. These expressions are useful when the memory is genuinely relevant to the choice; they are not requirements for every response.

Reminisce about means talk or think fondly about past experiences: “We could reminisce about when we first met.” A reception can be a gathering after a wedding ceremony, such as a lunch or dinner reception. When inclusion matters, feel left out describes feeling excluded from the group. Each expression should lead to the reason that the memory, event or inclusion matters to the decision.

Task 6: answer the concern behind the disagreement

Task 6 places the speaker between competing needs or views. After choosing a direction, the response explains that decision to the person who prefers the other option. Organize the response around an introduction, one or two reasons, a solution and a conclusion.

The solution is important because it responds to the concern behind the other preference. It gives the answer something more useful than a rejection. One well-developed reason can work when it provides enough explanation; a list of undeveloped reasons does not automatically make the answer stronger.

Question: a friend is late for a baseball game

You are going to a baseball game with James, Fiona and your younger sister. James is late and the game is about to begin. Fiona wants to wait outside so James will not have to enter alone. Your sister wants to go inside and find the seats before the start. You can explain to your sister why you want to wait, or explain to Fiona why you want to go inside.

The model chooses to speak to Fiona. It supports entering before the game begins while still helping James when he arrives.

Complete model answer

Hi Fiona, I understand that you don't want James to arrive alone, and it's thoughtful of you to consider him. However, I think we should go inside and find our seats now. The game is about to begin, and my sister is worried that we'll miss the start. If we keep waiting without knowing when James will arrive, all of us could miss something we've been looking forward to. How about calling James before we go in? We can tell him our section and seat numbers and ask him to message us when he reaches the entrance. If he has trouble finding us, I can meet him nearby and guide him to the seats. That way, we can watch the beginning while still helping James. I hope that sounds fair. Shall we give him a quick call?

The answer acknowledges Fiona's intention instead of dismissing it. It then states the decision and explains a consequence of waiting: everyone could miss a beginning they have been anticipating. Calling James, sharing the seat information and offering to guide him address the concern about leaving him alone. The solution connects the decision with practical help.

Build the disagreement from facts, consequences and help

The question already supplies useful facts. James is late; the game is about to start; Fiona does not want him to arrive alone. Going inside can be supported by the starting time, while waiting can be supported by the concern about his arrival. Reading the whole question reveals these reasons before any new detail is needed.

Consequences develop the facts. Waiting without knowing when James will arrive may mean missing the start. Entering without contacting him may leave him unsure where to find the group. Those two consequences explain why a phone call is a useful solution.

An introduction can explicitly acknowledge and disagree:

I understand that you want to wait for James instead of going inside. But I don't think that is the best solution, and here's why.

The strength of that wording can be adjusted to the relationship. The essential functions are recognition of the other view and a clear statement of the speaker's own position.

Having said that can turn from a reason towards a solution: “Having said that, I don't want James to feel left behind. Let's call him and explain where we'll be.” If you need my two cents means “if you want my opinion.” Offering help makes the solution practical: “If he has trouble finding the seats, I can meet him near the entrance.”

Given that introduces a relevant fact: “Given that the game is about to start, I think we should go inside and call James from our seats.” The fact supports the suggestion. “Let me suggest another option” is another way to introduce a solution, provided that the response explains how it would work.

If a second reason is hard to find, develop the first rather than repeating it. The reason is more than “the game is starting”: people have looked forward to the beginning, and waiting with no clear arrival time risks missing it. A precise detail or consequence develops that concern without requiring an unrelated argument.

Match the ending to the situation

Task 6 situations can involve a decision, a refusal, or conflicting invitations and events. Their endings need different emphases.

For a refusal, “I hope you can understand and see it from my perspective” asks for understanding. For an invitation that cannot be accepted, “I hope you understand that making this decision has been difficult for me. Please know that I'm sending you my best wishes” acknowledges the difficult choice and maintains goodwill. Other options include “I trust you to make the best decision” and “These are my thoughts. I hope you can understand and see it from my perspective.”

Specific details make the ending sound like part of this conversation. The baseball model ends with a proposed phone call because the solution requires one. An ending should fit the reasons and solution already given rather than introduce a disconnected closing line.

Preparation should produce explanations, not just labels

Use both Task 5 preparation stages. After choosing, note possible benefits; when the new option arrives, add the comparison. Practising that two-stage rhythm is different from preparing a single question all at once.

For both tasks, notes should preserve the detail behind an idea. “Variety—different tastes” is more useful than “food” alone. A reason thought of during preparation can disappear under pressure unless it is recorded. Short reminders can recover the next point when a sentence becomes difficult.

A little hesitation is normal. Spending five or ten seconds silently searching for a perfect sentence can damage the whole response. If a thought will not come, continue with another point that can be explained and return to the difficult wording during practice.

Idea generation takes repeated effort. Trying to produce ten possible points for one question encourages exploration beyond the first idea. Familiar topics such as work or food can also connect with a broader subject, such as learning about a community, when the connection is made explicit. An unusual idea is not automatically stronger than an ordinary relevant one explained well.

Try more than one answer to a familiar question instead of always repeating the first version. To connect work with learning about a community, explain the steps: working brings contact with people, and those conversations can build understanding of local life. To connect food with culture, explain how visiting different restaurants introduces different cuisines and communities. The connection must be spoken; simply naming “work” or “food” leaves the reason unfinished.

Prepared openings, endings and flexible examples reduce the number of decisions needed under pressure. They should support thinking rather than replace it with a fixed answer. Listenability still depends on clear pronunciation, intonation, fluent delivery and control of sentence structure. Task fulfilment still depends on answering the particular question in an appropriate tone. Complex language is useful when it communicates the relationship between ideas; unnecessarily long sentences are not the objective.