All English 4U · CELPIP · Set 5 Test 2
Finding the Right Information
Original Listening Practice · 6 parts · 38 questions
Listen for details, intentions and contrasting viewpoints in everyday and community situations.
Test mode: listen once, then answer within each response period. For accessible transcript review, switch to study mode.
Full timed MP3 (includes response pauses)
0 / 38 answered
Part 1: Listening to Problem Solving
Listen to three stages of a bicycle collection problem. Answer two, three and three questions. Follow the sequence and distinguish completed repairs from collection arrangements.
Checking the repair
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The first message covers the tube job alone. The brake must still be adjusted and tested before Noah sets out.
Evidence: “the ready message was sent from the tube job alone.”
Noah permits the included adjustment. He asks for a separate call and price before any replacement cable is fitted.
Evidence: “I am not authorising a new cable; just tighten the existing one if that is listed.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: Noah calls Cedar Wheel Workshop about his bicycle on Tuesday afternoon.
Woman: Cedar Wheel, Leah speaking. Have you received our collection message?
Man: Yes, but the tag says replace the rear tube and check the brake. The message just says ready. I need to know the brake was checked before I ride home. I usually cycle across town, and I cannot bring it back tomorrow morning.
Woman: The tube is done. The brake check is pending because the mechanic found a loose cable and wanted approval before adjusting it. The two jobs are listed separately on our screen.
Man: I thought the estimate included a basic adjustment. I am not authorising a new cable; just tighten the existing one if that is listed. If it needs replacing, call me with a price first.
Woman: You are right, tightening the current cable is included. I will ask the mechanic to finish and test it. Please wait for my second message; the ready message was sent from the tube job alone.
Man: Thanks. I will not set out until I have the test result. Please make the final message clear about both jobs.
Woman: I will. There is no need to pay again for the included adjustment.
Arranging collection
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The completed work uses the existing cable, and the original estimate still applies. Only the tube was replaced.
Evidence: “The existing cable is secure and the rear brake passed the bench test.”
The counter closes at six, but Noah’s bus arrives at six ten. The bay offers collection without staff assistance.
Evidence: “The counter closes at six. I can put the bike in the locked collection bay and send a one-use code.”
Leah changes the contact for this collection only. That temporary note does not update the account record.
Evidence: “I updated the contact for this collection only. Your account still has the old number.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: Leah calls Noah later on Tuesday afternoon.
Woman: The existing cable is secure and the rear brake passed the bench test. We replaced no part except the tube. Your original estimate still applies. The receipt will list each job separately so you can see what was checked.
Man: That is a relief. I finish work at five forty-five, but my bus reaches your street at six ten. Can someone stay at the counter for me?
Woman: The counter closes at six. I can put the bike in the locked collection bay and send a one-use code. Staff will not be there to help load it, and the bay is around the side, not at the front door.
Man: I can manage the bike myself. Send the code to my mobile ending forty-two, not the old number on my first form. The old phone no longer works.
Woman: I updated the contact for this collection only. Your account still has the old number. The code expires at nine tonight. Please check that you receive it before leaving work.
Man: I will use the bay if the message arrives. I will update my account separately when I have more time.
Correcting the collection plan
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The system used the old account number rather than the temporary workshop note. The email confirms readiness but contains no code.
Evidence: “The system used your account number, not the temporary number in my workshop note.”
Noah’s late finish makes the bay inconvenient. Leah cancels that code, offers free overnight storage and requires photo ID for counter collection.
Evidence: “Collect tomorrow by six with photo ID at the counter.”
The repair remains complete. The later message changes how and when he collects it, so it replaces the earlier collection instructions.
Evidence: “The old ready email remains, but the new message replaces its collection instructions.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: At seven o’clock on Tuesday evening, Noah reaches the workshop’s telephone support assistant, Leah.
Man: I am still at work and no code has arrived on the number ending forty-two. I have an email saying ready, but no collection instructions. My manager needs me here until eight thirty now.
Woman: I can see the problem. The system used your account number, not the temporary number in my workshop note. That old phone received the code. I can resend it, but the code still expires at nine tonight.
Man: With the later finish, getting there before nine would be difficult. Could you hold the bike inside overnight instead? I can leave work earlier tomorrow.
Woman: Yes. I will cancel the code and keep it in the locked workshop. Collect tomorrow by six with photo ID at the counter. The evening support line is still open, although the collection counter has closed.
Man: Is there a storage charge for the extra night?
Woman: No charge. I have sent a corrected message with Wednesday’s counter collection. The old ready email remains, but the new message replaces its collection instructions. Please reply to confirm that you received it.
Man: It has just arrived. Wednesday before six works for me.
Part 2: Listening to a Daily Life Conversation
Listen to Lina and Omar planning a neighbourhood clothing repair gathering. Notice which decisions are settled and which depend on further checks.
Planning the gathering
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
They need tables rather than a stage, and the main hall costs more. Approval and power checks remain pending.
Evidence: “The small room fits sixteen and has long tables. The main hall costs more and has a stage we do not need.”
Sixteen is the small room’s capacity. A larger group would need a different room, whose availability would have to be checked.
Evidence: “If attendance grows beyond sixteen, we can ask for the main hall later, subject to availability.”
Omar can supply leads but has not checked the outlets. Equipment offered by a volunteer is not a guarantee about the room.
Evidence: “I will not promise power for every machine until I check the outlets.”
Sam’s demonstration is optional. Pair practice with a sample lets the gathering continue without promising his attendance.
Evidence: “If not, we can use a sample patch for pair practice.”
Lina treats the room as essential and Sam’s demonstration as conditional. She will invite people after room confirmation while describing Sam as pending.
Evidence: “I will invite people only after the room is confirmed, and describe Sam’s demonstration as pending.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: Lina and Omar plan a neighbourhood clothing repair gathering.
Woman: Saturday the nineteenth is free on the hall calendar, but the caretaker has not approved our request. The small room fits sixteen and has long tables. The main hall costs more and has a stage we do not need.
Man: If more than sixteen come, we would exceed the small room’s limit. Can we hold both?
Woman: The system will not hold two rooms for one group. I will request the small room today. If attendance grows beyond sixteen, we can ask for the main hall later, subject to availability.
Man: I can bring two extension leads, but I will not promise power for every machine until I check the outlets. There is one socket by the entrance and one beside the cupboard.
Woman: Tell people machines are optional and bring hand needles too. I can supply thread, scissors and spare buttons.
Man: Sam offered to demonstrate denim patching, but I have not checked if he is free. If not, we can use a sample patch for pair practice.
Woman: I will invite people after room confirmation and say Sam is pending. Do not call the workshop confirmed before the caretaker replies.
Man: I will invite people only after the room is confirmed, and describe Sam’s demonstration as pending. A room request is not a booking. We should not ask people to arrange transport until the caretaker replies.
Woman: I will ask to use the side counter. If refused, refreshments stay outside. Please label tools; the hall is not responsible for items left behind.
Man: So: request the small room, check tables and outlets, and leave the demonstration and refreshments conditional.
Part 3: Listening for Information
Listen to a visitor asking a guide about a public observatory session. Follow the grouping, access arrangements and alternatives.
Public session briefing
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The ticket identifies a group rather than a seat. Staff organise access to the shared telescopes.
Evidence: “it shows your group, not a seat.”
The roof requires stairs. The lift serves the accessible gallery, where a seated-height telescope is available and the desk arranges places.
Evidence: “The lift serves this room and the accessible viewing gallery on level two, with a seated-height telescope.”
The telescopes are shared. Staff help with focus and direct turns; visitors are asked to leave the controls alone.
Evidence: “Staff help focus them; please do not touch the controls.”
The indoor model explains tracking and is explicitly not a live image. A particular sky target is never guaranteed.
Evidence: “The indoor model explains tracking; it is not a live image.”
The guide distinguishes the viewing scale of the two public telescopes, not different group ownership or separate equipment rules.
Evidence: “The first instrument gives a wide view, the second a closer look.”
Roof capacity prevents informal movement between groups. The desk can check the gallery or a later indoor session instead.
Evidence: “We cannot move people between groups ourselves because the roof has a safe capacity limit.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: A visitor asks a guide about tonight’s session at the fictional North Ridge Observatory.
Woman: Keep your ticket; it shows your group, not a seat. Blue begins here at seven, then goes to the roof at seven twenty. Gold starts upstairs. If clouds cover the sky, the roof activity becomes an indoor telescope demonstration.
Man: My father cannot manage steps. Is there a lift to the roof?
Woman: The roof has a short stairway. The lift serves this room and the accessible viewing gallery on level two, with a seated-height telescope. Ask the welcome desk; do not enter the staff corridor. The desk can arrange a place in the gallery.
Man: We have binoculars. May we use them, or bring our own telescope next time?
Woman: Binoculars are welcome in the gallery, but personal telescopes stay packed away during these sessions. The roof has two public telescopes. Staff help focus them; please do not touch the controls. Everyone has thirty-five minutes on the roof. The first instrument gives a wide view, the second a closer look. Stay with your group; the assistant directs turns.
Man: Are we guaranteed to see Saturn? My sister may arrive ten minutes late. Could she join Gold instead of Blue?
Woman: No target is guaranteed. Cloud, haze and timing affect visibility. The guide will show a star chart regardless. The indoor model explains tracking; it is not a live image. For a late arrival, ask the desk. We cannot move people between groups ourselves because the roof has a safe capacity limit. The desk can check gallery space or the later indoor session.
Man: I will tell her to ask there rather than following another group upstairs.
Woman: Thank you. Keep phones dim on the roof, and return borrowed red torches to the desk. The roof closes at eight forty-five. If weather changes, follow the guide’s instructions.
Part 4: Listening to a News Item
Listen to a local news report about a travelling heritage display. Distinguish reported evidence, limitations and future plans.
Local news report
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
An entry is a visit, not necessarily a unique person or a completed activity. The report explicitly includes brief and repeat visits.
Evidence: “That includes brief visits and people who returned, so it is not a count of unique residents.”
The cards offer feedback from people who chose to respond. That does not establish everyone’s source of information or compare demand by time.
Evidence: “Because cards were optional, responses cannot tell us how every visitor heard about the van.”
Riverside depends on electrical work. The backup has power but less queue space, so it is a contingency rather than an upgrade.
Evidence: “depending on electrical work in its parking area.”
Checking dates, names and a spelling improves records. The report explicitly limits that review and does not turn it into certification of every item.
Evidence: “This review improves records but is not full scholarly review of every item.”
Existing permission covers listening in the van. Online publication is a wider use that has not been agreed by all interviewees.
Evidence: “Interviewees have not all agreed to online publication; the team will ask each contributor before wider use.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: A local report covers Street Stories, a travelling heritage display in a converted van.
Woman: The municipal archive and a small arts grant support the project. Its first stop was East Market library car park. Visitors browse reproductions and listen to interviews through headphones. Original photographs remain in the archive; the van carries digitised copies.
Man: Staff counted 146 entries on opening day. That includes brief visits and people who returned, so it is not a count of unique residents.
Woman: Optional exit cards most often named a noticeboard or neighbour. Because cards were optional, responses cannot tell us how every visitor heard about the van. Some asked for longer evening hours, but the team has not compared demand by time.
Narrator: Riverside recreation centre is scheduled for Thursday, depending on electrical work in its parking area. If delayed, the van will go to a backup site at the bus exchange, which has power but less queue space.
Man: Two history groups are checking caption dates and names. Staff corrected a spelling. This review improves records but is not full scholarly review of every item.
Woman: Permission forms cover listening inside the van only. Interviewees have not all agreed to online publication; the team will ask each contributor before wider use.
Narrator: At month end, organisers will compare attendance, cards and operating costs with budget. They hope to learn whether to visit more neighbourhoods next year, but this small pilot cannot prove city-wide impact.
Man: The weekly schedule can change. Call the archive or check its noticeboard before travelling. The archive will post an update if Thursday’s location changes.
Part 5: Listening to a Discussion
Watch Priya, Elliot and Rosa discuss a shared workplace reference shelf. Compare their concerns, conditions and final agreement.
Colleague discussion
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The digital folder is current, but people still ask which version applies. Priya wants reliable access rather than an unofficial archive.
Evidence: “colleagues ask which version applies.”
Elliot recalls a visible checklist that continued to be used after the online process changed. Availability can therefore preserve an obsolete version.
Evidence: “A visible checklist remained on a desk after the online process changed, and people used it.”
Rosa recognises problems in the folder but proposes controls for the shelf. Her support does not remove the need to maintain digital access.
Evidence: “Limit the shelf to a few approved guides with an owner and live link.”
The discussion links the risk of changing contacts to the cost of stale information. The shelf should begin with relatively stable, lower-risk guides.
Evidence: “A stale contact has a higher cost than a missing glossary.”
His phone opened a link that failed at a shared workstation. Testing varied access conditions checks more than whether a code can be scanned.
Evidence: “We had a link open on my phone but fail at a shared workstation because it led to my personal folder.”
He combines fewer location questions, no stale-copy reports and timely review. Usage alone would leave reliability untested.
Evidence: “A busy shelf alone is not success.”
The trial has limits and safeguards, followed by a choice to continue, revise or remove it. Agreement on testing is not agreement on permanent rollout.
Evidence: “Then decide to continue, revise or remove it.”
Rosa includes screen-reader users and people needing larger type. This tests whether the shelf adds a usable route without weakening digital access.
Evidence: “Include feedback from screen-reader users and people needing larger type.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: A workplace meeting considers a shared reference shelf. Priya sits left in teal, Elliot centre in navy glasses, Rosa right in rust.
Priya: I support making guides easier to find. The digital folder is current, but colleagues ask which version applies. A small shelf could hold approved print copies and point to the online file. Someone must own review dates and remove old copies; I do not want an unofficial archive.
Elliot: A visible checklist remained on a desk after the online process changed, and people used it. I would test one shelf for a month before installing more.
Rosa: The folder is not effortless either: new staff cannot tell templates from examples or final references. Limit the shelf to a few approved guides with an owner and live link. Ask people who use the room, including those away from screens.
Priya: Print should not replace accessible digital copies. Some need searchable text or larger type. A short code should lead directly to a named document, not a generic folder. A direct link must work for a new employee as well as for its owner. A document that opens for me may ask somebody else for permission.
Elliot: Test the code on a phone and workstation, with a short address as backup. I can do the first monthly review if a team lead names my backup; otherwise the date may mean nothing. We had a link open on my phone but fail at a shared workstation because it led to my personal folder. Testing both would catch that before people rely on the shelf.
Rosa: Start with stable guides: onboarding map, room booking steps and project glossary. The safety contacts change, so keep that digital unless the printed sheet has a review date and verification instruction.
Priya: A stale contact has a higher cost than a missing glossary. Record what people seek and whether they reach the current version.
Elliot: Success means fewer repeated questions about where a guide lives, no reports of an outdated print copy, and a review log completed on time. A busy shelf alone is not success.
Rosa: Include feedback from screen-reader users and people needing larger type. An accessible link and optional shelf could add a route without making digital maintenance harder.
Priya: I support a one-month trial with three guides, an owner and backup, direct links and varied user feedback. Then decide to continue, revise or remove it.
Elliot: Agreed. I will draft the log. We can choose guides after their owners confirm current versions are stable. Let us also note how long each review takes. If keeping three guides reliable already uses more time than we can spare, adding shelves would increase the problem rather than solve it.
Part 6: Listening for Viewpoints
Listen to a commentator evaluating digital public notices. Connect each recommendation to its evidence and limitations.
Civic commentary
Listen first. Questions open after the recording.
Listen once before choosing your answers. Use the transcript when reviewing.
The commentator recognises faster central updating as useful. The later argument adds access, verification and archive requirements rather than treating those as automatic benefits.
Evidence: “Displays could make notices easier to update centrally: road closures, meeting times or service interruptions need not wait for paper replacement.”
A current notice can still be inaccessible, poorly located or missed between cycles. The distinction concerns practical reach as well as accuracy.
Evidence: “Current is not the same as available to everyone.”
Possible printing savings are only part of the comparison. Power, software, equipment and verification time may affect the net cost.
Evidence: “compare electricity, network, replacement screens, software support and staff time to verify updates.”
The recommendation requires successful access, understanding, reliability and support. Counts or one convenient site cannot establish all those conditions.
Evidence: “Expand only if people find and understand notices, updates are reliable and paper or staff help works when technology fails.”
The speaker distinguishes aggregate counts from identifying techniques and calls for transparency, necessity and retention limits before installation.
Evidence: “State what data is collected, avoid identifying people without clear need and publish retention limits before measurement tools are installed.”
The commentator supports a mixed system, recognises benefits and sets conditions for expansion. Neither immediate replacement nor complete rejection reflects that qualified support.
Evidence: “I support displays as part of a mixed system, tested where updates are frequent and support exists.”
Review transcript — open after listening
Narrator: A civic commentator considers replacing printed public notices with digital displays.
Woman: Displays could make notices easier to update centrally: road closures, meeting times or service interruptions need not wait for paper replacement. That matters when an outdated notice sends someone to a closed counter.
Woman: Current is not the same as available to everyone. A lobby screen may not reach people elsewhere. Older residents, people with low vision, visitors who use other languages and people without reliable phone access may need paper or staff explanation. Ask who needs each notice and where.
Woman: A screen cycles messages; someone arriving between cycles may miss one. Motion attracts attention but can make long instructions harder to read. A fixed index or printed summary makes the display a route to information, not a gate.
Woman: Printing and delivery savings are possible, but compare electricity, network, replacement screens, software support and staff time to verify updates. A failed network can freeze an old notice. A date label helps, but someone must check and provide a fallback.
Woman: A pilot should compare locations with different users and service patterns. Keep paper during the test, record questions to staff, and ask whether visitors found the notice. A scan count or screen view does not prove understanding; low counts may mean poor placement.
Woman: Privacy matters. Aggregate interaction counts differ from cameras or device tracking. State what data is collected, avoid identifying people without clear need and publish retention limits before measurement tools are installed.
Woman: Notices also form a record. Keep dated versions in an accessible archive and identify the current notice, so residents can check what wording appeared when a decision was made.
Woman: Compare a quiet library lobby with a busy service centre rather than treating every screen as the same experiment. A notice can be accurate yet overlooked. If staff explain it repeatedly, that is useful evidence about presentation, not proof that the visitors are unwilling to read.
Woman: I support displays as part of a mixed system, tested where updates are frequent and support exists. I would not remove paper city-wide based on expected savings or a few successful screens. Expand only if people find and understand notices, updates are reliable and paper or staff help works when technology fails.
Submit to grade your whole test, OR use 👁 Show Answer per part / per question.
Show Answer does not fill your answer or earn credit.
Build your listening strategies
Follow the changing arrangement
For a problem-solving conversation, track the initial request, the difficulty and the final action. A later instruction may replace part of an earlier message without cancelling everything it said.
Separate decisions from conditions
Listen for only after, if, subject to and pending. Note which checks are essential and which optional feature can change without cancelling the whole plan.
Trace access and alternatives
In an information conversation, connect a person’s need with the available route. Keep schedules, capacity limits and the person authorised to change an arrangement distinct.
Match claims to evidence
A visit count, a voluntary response and an expert check support different conclusions. Listen for what was measured and what the speaker says it cannot establish.
Compare concerns and agreement
Track each speaker’s reason, proposed safeguard and remaining reservation. Agreement to run a trial does not necessarily mean agreement to keep a policy permanently.
Evaluate a qualified viewpoint
Identify the benefit the speaker accepts, the limitations they raise and the conditions attached to their recommendation. Choose the option that preserves those qualifications rather than merely repeating a familiar topic word.
