One video, three positions, one shared question screen
Part 5 is a relatively informal discussion among three speakers. The official study pack describes a video of about one and a half to two minutes, followed by about eight questions inside an approximate nine-minute part. The speakers exchange facts, opinions, and emotions and may disagree about a practical community, study, or team decision.
Like Parts 4 and 6, Part 5 uses written sentence-completion questions. All eight questions and their four answer choices appear together after the video. The remaining part time applies to the whole screen, so answer direct matches first and return to questions that require a close inference.
Who believes what, why, and with whom
The central challenge is attribution. A note can contain the correct idea and still lead to the wrong answer if it is attached to the wrong speaker. Questions may ask about a proposal, the reason for it, a reaction, an area of agreement, or an attitude implied by word choice, stress, facial expression, and the direction of the exchange.
Agreement is rarely all or nothing. One speaker may accept the goal but reject the proposed timing. Another may concede a disadvantage and still support the plan. Record these qualifications. Words such as but, although, still, and unless often tell you which part of the message controls the final position.
Use three columns and track each turn
- Draw left, centre, right.Label speakers by screen position as they are introduced. Keep every idea inside the correct column.
- Write the shared issue once.Across the top, state the decision or problem in a few words. This keeps small details connected to the purpose.
- Record position plus reason.Use compact pairs such as Sat + families, Sun + volunteers, or delay → permits.
- Mark relationships.Use ✓ for agreement, × for disagreement, and ~ for partial agreement. Add an arrow when a speaker changes or narrows a position.
- Check the final direction.Before questions appear, note any decision, compromise, unresolved point, or action the group will take next.
Do not write a transcript. The useful unit is speaker → position → reason. When the video supplies a clear attitude clue, add one ordinary word such as relieved, doubtful, or enthusiastic. Do not infer emotion from appearance alone; connect it to what the person says and how it is delivered.
Keep a concession attached to the final view
This original written rehearsal is not an official CELPIP prompt. Imagine the three speakers are choosing when to hold a neighbourhood tool-sharing orientation.
Left — Priya: “Saturday morning will attract more families. I know the community room is smaller then, but people can visit the market afterward.”
Centre — Marcus: “Sunday afternoon gives us the larger room, but two of our repair volunteers cannot come. Without them, we can demonstrate only the simplest tools.”
Right — Elena: “I preferred Sunday at first. Marcus is right about the volunteers, though. Let’s use Saturday and run two shorter sessions if registration is high.”
Notes: issue—orientation time / P: Sat + families, accepts small room / M: Sun + room, but − volunteers / E: Sun → Sat, proposes 2 sessions
Complete the sentence: Elena supports Saturday mainly because _____.
- the market will provide extra tools
- the larger room is unavailable Sunday
- important volunteers can attend then
- families requested two separate sessions
Evidence path: Elena changes her original preference after Marcus explains the volunteer problem. C expresses the reason for the change. The two-session idea manages the smaller room; it is not something families requested.
Where three-speaker notes break down
- Writing names in one list. Ideas drift between speakers because the page has no stable left, centre, and right structure.
- Recording proposals without reasons. Two people support the same option for different reasons, and the question targets the difference.
- Treating partial agreement as full agreement. A speaker accepts the aim but objects to cost, timing, or method.
- Freezing the first opinion. A concession or new fact changes a speaker’s final position, but the notes preserve only the opening view.
- Watching decorative details. Attention leaves the conversation to memorize clothing or furniture that does not advance the issue.
- Solving in screen order. A difficult attitude question consumes the shared window before direct speaker-detail questions are secured.
Identify partial agreement
Amir: “A digital sign would make updates easy, but it would cost most of this year’s budget.”
Nora: “That flexibility is useful. Still, I would start with a printed board and review the digital option next year.”
Complete the sentence: Nora agrees with Amir that a digital sign _____.
- would simplify future updates
- should use the full annual budget
- needs to be installed this year
- is cheaper than a printed board
Reveal the answer
A. Nora accepts the benefit of flexibility but rejects buying the sign now. Agreement on one feature does not mean agreement on the decision.
Check the speaker map before checking the score
- Did I label three columns by the speakers’ positions on screen?
- Could I state the shared issue or decision in one line?
- Did each proposal remain attached to the correct speaker and reason?
- Did I mark agreement, disagreement, and partial agreement separately?
- Did I record any changed position, concession, compromise, or final action?
- Did I use body language only as support for conversation meaning?
- On the grouped screen, did I answer direct matches before harder inferences?