Task 2 Templates (Respond to a Survey)

Task 2 is a short survey response: 150–200 words (aim ~180) in about 26 minutes. Pick one side, defend it with two reasons and short examples, and close by handling the other side.

No greeting. No sign-off. Open with your opinion.

First: which shape are you in?

One map covers both. Everything between the opening and the nod is identical.

The 4-part map

1. Opening — your choice, in the first line
2. Reason A + one short example
3. Reason B (different angle) + one short example
4. Close + the nod — acknowledge the other side, answer it, restate your choice

The nod is scored, not optional. Naming the opposing view and answering it earns credit under Content & Coherence and Task Fulfillment. If you've seen older advice calling it "optional if you have space," ignore it — skipping the nod costs you marks you could have had.

🎥 Watch a real answer climb from 6 to 10 (14:28)

This page gives you the lines. The video shows what happens when you use them badly — the same prompt answered three times, including a version stuffed with impressive vocabulary that still can't reach a 10. Worth watching before you start borrowing phrases from the banks below.

📚 The full CELPIP Writing Course is free — [COURSE LINK]

1. Opening lines

Two-option

Plug lines

• I support X because it solves the main problem.
• I prefer X since it reduces wait times / costs / confusion.
• I would choose X because it helps the most people in daily life.
• X is the better option, because it improves reliability / access / safety.
• I support Option B: [restate it in your own words]. [Main reason in one clause.]

Filled examples

• Transit: I support bus-only lanes because they cut travel time and keep trips on schedule.
• Parks: I prefer building washrooms because they serve families during long events.
• Library: I would choose extended hours because they help students who work evenings.
• Recycling: I support door-to-door pickup for electronics because it prevents unsafe disposal.
• Parking: I prefer resident permits because they protect evening parking near homes.

Agree/disagree

Plug lines — agreeing

• I agree that [the proposal]. The main reason is that [core idea].
• I support the proposal to [do X], mainly because [reason].
• I think [the proposal] is worth doing. [Main reason in one clause.]
• Yes — [proposal] would [benefit], and that matters more than [the usual objection].

Plug lines — disagreeing

• I disagree that [the proposal]. The problem is that [core idea].
• I don't think the [council / building / company] should [do X], because [reason].
• [Proposal] sounds reasonable, but it [fails to address the real issue].
• I'd rather see [alternative] than [proposal], because [reason].

Filled examples

• I agree that the community centre should stay open until nine on weekdays. For many residents, a six o'clock closing makes it almost useless during the week.
• I disagree that the city should ban cars downtown on Sundays. It would hurt exactly the small businesses it's meant to help.
• I agree that the company should allow two work-from-home days. The office day and the productive day are not the same thing for everyone.

Never open with a warm-up. "After careful consideration…" / "This is an important issue facing many communities…" spends your first fifteen words saying nothing. Lead with the choice.

2. Reason A + example

Frames

• First, this reduces / protects / prevents…
• To start, it improves…
• The main reason is that…
• For many people, this means…
• [Your side] works because…

Pick your angle

Your two reasons must come from different rows. Same row twice is one reason written out twice — and a grader sees it.

Example frames

Every reason needs a time, number, place, or specific person. Ten to fifteen words is enough.

• For example, on __ days / at __ o'clock, …
• On my route / In our building / On my floor, …
• Last winter / Last Saturday / Most evenings, …
• A trip that should take __ often takes __.
• Someone who __ can't easily __.

Ready to adapt

• Reliability: During rush hour, buses arrive 15–20 minutes late; a dedicated lane would keep them on time.
• Access: Weekend events draw crowds; families face 15-minute washroom lines near the playground.
• Safety: Poor lighting after 9 p.m. makes the path unsafe; new lights would prevent falls.
• Time: Most jobs end around five or six, so by the time someone gets home the centre has closed.
• Money: A small fee change doesn't help if trips still take twice as long.
• Clarity: Posting daily updates stops residents calling the office repeatedly.

3. Reason B + example (a different angle)

Frames

• Second, it encourages / supports / prevents…
• There's also a practical side: …
• Another benefit is that it helps…
• Beyond that, …
• This also means people can…

Ready to adapt

• New users: Faster trips attract students to public transit, reducing traffic for everyone.
• Year-round use: Clean washrooms keep parks usable in winter, not just in summer.
• Fairness: Resident permits protect evening parking near apartments and reduce conflicts.
• Environment: Electronics pickup stops hazardous waste going into regular bins.
• Crowding: Longer hours spread visitors across the evening instead of forcing everyone in before six.
• Learning: Later library hours help shift workers study after work.

4. The close + the nod

The three-move formula

Concede → Limit → Redirect

1. Concede — name the other side's real point.
2. Limit — show it's smaller, or solvable.
3. Redirect — return to your choice and stop.

Two or three sentences. This is a closing note, not a second argument.

Concession bank — two-option

• Admittedly, some people worry about [X]. But that's fixable — [solution] — without [losing your benefit].
• Y does help [specific group], and for them that's real. But it doesn't fix [the main problem].
• A would solve [minor issue], but B solves the one people face every day.
• While Y is useful, it doesn't address [delays / access / safety].
• Extra [Y] is nice to have, but [X] solves the urgent problem on busy days.

Concession bank — agree/disagree

• Of course, [the objection] is a fair concern. Still, [limit] — so [your side] is worth it.
• Some residents worry about [cost / noise / staffing]. That's reasonable, but [smaller version of the plan] would meet most of the demand.
• It's true that [objection]. But that argues for [adjusting how], not for dropping the idea.
• I understand why people object to [X]. Even so, [your reason] outweighs it for most people.
• This isn't free — [cost]. But [benefit] is worth that.

Final lines

• For these reasons, X delivers the bigger benefit.
• In short, X solves the main issue, so it's the better choice.
• On balance, [proposal] is worth doing.
• For these reasons, [proposal] is worth trying.

Don't write a recap. A closing that re-summarises both reasons burns 30 words you needed for evidence. One line is enough.

5) The delete list — run this before you submit

Every pattern below is a symptom of writing to impress rather than to communicate. All of them are grammatically fine, which is exactly why they're dangerous — spell check won't flag a single one.

The test: read the sentence out loud. Would you say it to a friend describing the same situation? If not, rewrite it in the words you'd actually use.

Mini-templates — two-option

Six topics, each a full worked answer. None of these appear in the video, so they're additional practice, not a repeat.

A) Transit — bus lanes vs. fare cut

Opening: I support bus-only lanes because they cut travel time and keep buses on schedule.
Reason A (time): During rush hour, trips that should take 20 minutes often become 40; dedicated lanes keep routes moving.
Reason B (people affected): Faster trips bring new riders, which reduces traffic for everyone.
Nod: A small fare cut helps current riders, but lanes fix the cause of the delays.

Full sample — 168 words. I support adding bus-only lanes, because they cut travel time and make service reliable. Price matters, but people stop using buses when trips take too long or the schedule can't be trusted.
First, dedicated lanes keep buses moving during rush hour. On Main Street, a trip that should take 20 minutes often becomes 40 because buses sit behind single-occupant cars. A bus lane would let them bypass that queue and stay on schedule.
Second, faster and more predictable trips bring in new riders. Commuters plan around time, not small savings. If the ride is quicker, more students and workers will leave the car at home, which reduces traffic for everyone.
A 10% fare cut does help people who already ride, and for someone on a tight budget that is real money every month. But a cheaper ticket doesn't make the bus arrive — when buses run late, people still miss classes and shifts. For these reasons, bus-only lanes deliver the bigger benefit for daily commuters.

B) Parks — benches vs. washrooms

Opening: I prefer more park washrooms because they keep the park usable during long events.
Reason A (access): Weekend festivals bring crowds; parents with young children wait 15 minutes or leave early.
Reason B (reliability): Clean facilities keep parks usable in winter and for seniors.
Nod: Extra benches are pleasant, but washrooms solve the problem that actually sends people home.

Full sample — 156 words. I prefer adding washrooms, because they are what keeps the park usable during long events.
First, weekend concerts bring big crowds, and families face long lines near the stage. Last Saturday the only washroom by the playground had a 15-minute queue, and several parents left with their children before the music had even finished. A second facility on the east side would spread that demand.
Second, clean washrooms make the park practical year-round rather than just in summer. People still walk here in the colder months, and a warm, well-lit building is often what decides whether an older resident comes at all. Without one, the park effectively closes for half the year.
Benches would make the park more comfortable, and on a quiet weekday afternoon that is genuinely welcome. But seating is not what sends families home early on the days the park is busiest. For these reasons, washrooms give regular users more value.

C) Library — more computers vs. longer hours

Opening: I support longer library hours because they help people who work evenings.
Reason A (time): Many finish shifts after 6 p.m.; staying open to 9 p.m. lets them study.
Reason B (crowding): Later hours spread visitors across time, reducing queues at the computers.
Nod: More computers helps at peak, but without more time the peak just stays crowded.

D) Recycling — street bins vs. electronics pickup

Opening: I prefer door-to-door electronics pickup because it prevents unsafe disposal.
Reason A (environment): Old devices end up in regular bins; pickups stop batteries reaching landfill.
Reason B (access): A scheduled pickup is manageable for seniors who can't carry heavy items.
Nod: Street bins are useful for small items, but they don't handle the hazardous ones.

E) Parking — free evenings vs. resident permits

Opening: I support resident parking permits because they protect evening spaces near homes.
Reason A (fairness): After 6 p.m. visitors fill the street and residents carry groceries two blocks.
Reason B (practicality): Permits still allow guest passes with time limits, so visitors aren't shut out.
Nod: Free evening parking helps visitors on event nights, but residents need to park every night.

F) School — uniforms vs. dress code

Opening: I prefer a simple dress code because it reduces costs while keeping standards.
Reason A (money): Uniforms are expensive, especially when a family needs more than one set.
Reason B (practicality): Clear rules — no large logos, safe shoes — keep the school tidy without one fixed outfit.
Nod: Uniforms do remove daily arguments about clothes, but a dress code achieves the same at lower cost.

Mini-templates — agree/disagree

Four in the shape most people never practise. Note how only the opening and the nod change.

G) Community centre hours (agree)

Statement: The community centre should extend weekday hours until 9:00 p.m.

Opening: I agree — a six o'clock closing makes the centre almost useless on weekdays.
Reason A (time): Most jobs end around five or six, so by the time someone gets home it's already closed.
Reason B (crowding): Later hours spread visitors across the evening instead of forcing everyone in before six.
Nod: Staying open later does raise staffing and energy costs — but even two or three extra evenings would meet most of the demand.

Full sample — 175 words. I agree that the community centre should stay open until nine on weekdays. For many residents, a six o'clock closing time makes the centre almost useless during the week.
First, later hours would help people who work full days. Most jobs finish around five or six, so by the time someone gets home and changes, the doors are shut. If it stayed open until nine, workers could use the gym or book a meeting room after dinner instead of giving up on it.
Second, spreading visitors across the evening would ease the crush. Right now everyone tries to squeeze in before six, so the machines and study rooms fill immediately. Longer hours would let people come at different times and actually find space.
Of course, staying open later does raise staffing and energy costs, and that money has to come from somewhere. Still, even opening a few extra evenings a week would meet most of the demand without a large budget increase. For these reasons, extending the hours is worth it.

H) Car-free Sundays downtown (disagree)

Statement: The city should close downtown streets to cars on Sundays.

Opening: I disagree — it would hurt exactly the small businesses it's meant to help.
Reason A (money): Sunday is the busiest trading day for many shops, and much of that trade arrives by car from outside the centre.
Reason B (access): People with limited mobility, and anyone carrying a large purchase, can't simply walk in from a distant car park.
Nod: Quieter streets genuinely are pleasant, but the same effect could come from closing one street, not the whole centre.

I) Hallway security cameras (agree)

Statement: The building should install security cameras in all hallways.

Opening: I agree — package theft and late-night disturbances have made the building feel less safe.
Reason A (safety): Deliveries disappear from doorways regularly, and without footage nothing can be resolved.
Reason B (practicality): Cameras also settle disputes about damage in shared spaces, which currently turn into arguments with no evidence.
Nod: Privacy is a real concern, but hallways are shared space, and clear rules on who can view footage would address most objections.

J) Two work-from-home days (agree)

Statement: The company should allow staff two work-from-home days per week.

Opening: I agree — the office day and the productive day are not the same thing for everyone.
Reason A (practicality): Concentrated work gets broken up every few minutes in an open office.
Reason B (time/money): Many staff spend over an hour a day commuting — time and money spent on nothing productive.
Nod: Some work genuinely needs people in the same room, and new staff learn faster sitting beside someone experienced — but that argues for choosing which days are in the office, not for scrapping the idea.

Before → After

No clear choice
Before: Both ideas are good.
After: I support X because it solves the main problem.

List with no support
Before: It's cheaper, cleaner, and easier.
After: It's faster in rush hour and cuts missed transfers; the 5:40 bus regularly arrives after 6:00.

Two reasons that are really one
Before: "It helps families." + "It helps parents with children."
After: Access — "families leave events early." Reliability — "the park stays usable in winter."

Optional-sounding nod
Before: "Some might prefer the other option."
After: "Free evening parking helps visitors, but residents need to park every night, not just on event nights."

Essay tone
Before: In summation, the aforementioned proposals exhibit considerable merit.
After: For these reasons, X helps more people.

Wrong task shape
Before: "Dear Sir or Madam, … Kind regards, Amir."
After: Open with your opinion. No greeting, no sign-off.

Build-and-go checklist

• I identified the shape — two-option or agree/disagree

• Choice in the first line, no warm-up

• Two reasons, from different rows of the angle grid

• One concrete example each — a time, number, place or person

• The nod: concede → limit → redirect

• Four paragraphs, blank line between each

• Ran the delete list — nothing left I wouldn't say out loud

• No greeting, no sign-off

• 150–200 words, close to 180

Practice

1. Shape swap (10 min). Take template B (parks — benches vs. washrooms) and rewrite it as an agree/disagree answer to: "The city should build new washrooms in Riverside Park." Only your opening line and your nod should need real work — that's the point.

2. Build a nod (5 min). Write a concede → limit → redirect closing for each: (a) longer library hours, (b) resident parking permits, (c) car-free Sundays. Three sentences maximum each.

3. De-pad it (10 min). Rewrite this opening using the delete list: "After careful consideration of the various proposals under discussion, I would like to state that I strongly support the initiative which would facilitate extended operational hours, as this approach promotes inclusivity." Target: under 20 words.

4. Fill a blank template (26 min). Pick any topic from A–J, cover the sample, and rebuild the full answer from the frames alone. Then compare. Where you reached for the sample is where you still need the phrase bank open.

5. Timed run. A real prompt on CELPIP Writing Task 2: Survey Questions with instant AI feedback on all four criteria.

Related:

• Lesson 5 — Task 2 Essentials for the method behind these templates
• Lesson 7 — Vocabulary for Precision
• Lesson 12 — Common Errors.