What makes Reading Part 4 tricky?

It asks you to separate competing viewpoints and judge their strength. Attitude and opinion vocabulary is the key to keeping the positions straight.

Does Part 4 use difficult vocabulary?

It uses higher-CLB opinion and argument words. The entries below focus on exactly the stance language that Part 4 relies on.

Reading Part 4: Reading for Viewpoints

Reading Part 4: Reading for Viewpoints is part of the Reading section of the CELPIP General test. You get 10 questions and 13 minutes. It is scored by the number of correct answers.

Questions: 10
Time: 13 minutes
Prompts here: 30 published

The three-move viewpoint read

1
Decide each writer's position before you look at a question
Two or more people disagree here. Fixing who thinks what first is what stops the answers blurring.
2
Track the attitude, not only the argument
Our Part 4 tags run vocabulary 30, inference 27, tone 24 — how something is said is tested nearly as often as what is said.
3
Pick the word that carries the same attitude
A neutral synonym for a loaded word is the classic wrong answer in this part.

Part 4 asks what the writer thinks, not what is true.

Your own view on the topic is never the answer.

Build the opinion, argument and attitude vocabulary you need to track different viewpoints in the article-plus-comment format of CELPIP Reading Part 4.

Part 4 presents an article and a reader comment with contrasting opinions. Recognising stance and attitude vocabulary helps you tell whose view is whose and how strongly it is held.

Reading · Part 4

Reading for Viewpoints: The Four-Day Work Week Debate

One of 30 published prompts · free, no account

OPINION: Before We Cheer the Four-Day Week, Let's Read the Fine Print Every few months, another headline announces that the four-day work week has "arrived." A software firm in Guelph trims its hours, a marketing agency in Halifax follows, and suddenly the idea feels inevitable. As someone who has managed teams through both busy and quiet seasons, I understand the appeal. Still, I think we are cheering the results of a few well-run trials before we have read the fine print that comes with them. The strongest argument for the shorter week is not laziness; it is focus. Supporters point to pilot programs, including a widely reported British trial, in which most participating companies kept output steady while giving staff an extra day off. The logic is that a compressed schedule forces teams to cut wasteful meetings and guard their attention. Employees, meanwhile, report lower burnout and more time for family, errands, and rest. In a country where winter commutes are long and daylight is short, an extra day at home is no small prize. I do not dispute those benefits. What worries me is how selectively they are reported. The firms that volunteer for trials tend to be small, profitable, and staffed by knowledge workers whose tasks can be squeezed. A graphic designer may indeed finish the same work in thirty-two hours. A nurse, a bus driver, or a line cook cannot simply think faster; their hours are tied to shifts that someone must fill. When a hospital adopts a four-day week, it does not shrink the work. It hires more people or asks the same staff to work longer days, which can leave them more tired, not less. There is also the quiet question of who pays. In the celebrated trials, salaries stayed flat while hours fell, and that generosity is precisely what makes the results attractive. But a struggling retailer facing thin margins may keep the four-day label while stretching each remaining day to ten hours, or by trimming pay to match. The headline stays cheerful; the reality on the floor does not. Without clear rules, "four-day week" risks becoming a marketing phrase rather than a genuine improvement in working life. Critics on the other side worry about something different: momentum. They argue that once a few visible employers adopt the model, workers everywhere will expect it, and companies that cannot deliver will struggle to hire. That pressure, they say, could push firms into promises they cannot keep. I find this concern reasonable but overstated. Competition for talent has always shaped benefits, from dental plans to remote work, and the sky has not fallen yet. So where does that leave us? I am not against the four-day week; I am against adopting it as a slogan. Before a company makes the leap, it should ask honest questions. Can our particular work actually be compressed, or only reshuffled? Will pay and staffing stay whole? And are we measuring real output, or simply the good feelings of employees who are, understandably, delighted with a free Friday? If the answers hold up, I will happily join the applause. A rested workforce is a productive one, and Canadians deserve schedules that respect life outside the office. But enthusiasm is not evidence. The four-day week may well be the future of work. It will only earn that title if we are as careful reading its costs as we are quick to celebrate its promise.

Instructions

Read the opinion article, then answer the questions.
For the reader's comment, choose the best word for each blank.

The reply to complete

I finished this article feeling more ___6___ than I expected. The writer clearly likes the idea, yet refuses to ___7___ the parts that don't fit neatly on a poster. That point about nurses and bus drivers really landed for me: my sister works twelve-hour shifts, and no amount of "focus" makes a ward staff itself. What I ___8___ from the piece is that the label matters far less than the details underneath it. If a company keeps my pay and my staffing whole, I'm all for it; if it just stretches my Monday-to-Thursday into exhaustion, that's not a gift. The ___9___ here isn't cheerleading and it isn't gloom, which is why I trust it. Honestly, more workplace debates could use this kind of ___10___ caution.

Questions & answer key10 questions

Reading is scored by the number of correct answers, so there is no rubric to satisfy — only the text in front of you. Every question below has its answer and an explanation of why the other options fail.

1Gap 6 in the reply
1. Abored
2. Bindifferent
3. ✓persuaded
4. Dfurious
Answer
C
The commenter says they trust the piece and found points that "really landed," so "persuaded" (won over) fits a positive-but-thoughtful reaction. "Furious" and "bored" contradict the approving tone; "indifferent" contradicts "more ___ than I expected" plus the engaged praise that follows.
2Gap 7 in the reply
1. Ameasure
2. Breward
3. ✓ignore
4. Dcelebrate
Answer
C
"Refuses to ___ the parts that don't fit" means he does not overlook the awkward parts, matching the article's insistence on reading the fine print. "Celebrate" and "reward" reverse the meaning (he criticizes those parts); "measure" is a real article word but wrong here, since you cannot "refuse to measure the parts that don't fit" coherently in this praise.
3Gap 8 in the reply
1. Aforget
2. Bhide
3. ✓take away
4. Ddoubt
Answer
C
"What I ___ from the piece is that the label matters less than the details" states the reader's conclusion, so "take away" (conclude/learn) fits. "Doubt" and "forget" contradict stating a firm lesson; "hide" makes no sense with "from the piece is that...".
4Gap 9 in the reply
1. ✓tone
2. Bsalary
3. Cheadline
4. Dschedule
Answer
A
"The ___ here isn't cheerleading and it isn't gloom" describes the writing's balanced attitude, which is its tone. "Salary" and "schedule" are real topics in the article but cannot be "cheerleading or gloom"; "headline" is mentioned in the article but the sentence describes the whole piece's stance, not a headline.
5Gap 10 in the reply
1. Areckless
2. Bangry
3. ✓measured
4. Dcheerful
Answer
C
The commenter admires the author's careful, balanced skepticism, so "measured" caution fits. "Reckless" is the opposite of caution; "cheerful" and "angry" name one extreme each, but the comment praises the article precisely for being neither.
6What is the writer's main position on the four-day work week?
1. AIt is a harmful idea that will damage most workplaces.
2. ✓It may be worthwhile but should be examined carefully before adoption.
3. CIt should be adopted by every company as soon as possible.
4. DIt only benefits large corporations and hurts small firms.
Answer
B
The writer states "I am not against the four-day week; I am against adopting it as a slogan" and urges honest questions first, then says he will "happily join the applause" if answers hold up. "Every company as soon as possible" overstates his caution; "harmful idea" contradicts his openness; the small-firm point is a supporting detail, not his overall position.
7According to the writer, why can some jobs NOT simply be compressed into fewer hours?
1. ABecause their workers refuse to change old habits.
2. BBecause they involve too many wasteful meetings.
3. ✓Because their hours are tied to shifts that someone must fill.
4. DBecause their employees are not knowledge workers who enjoy trials.
Answer
C
The passage says a nurse, bus driver, or line cook "cannot simply think faster; their hours are tied to shifts that someone must fill." "Refuse to change habits" is never claimed. "Wasteful meetings" is what knowledge workers cut, the opposite case. Being "not knowledge workers" is true but is not the reason given; the reason is the shift structure.
8What does the writer mean by warning about "who pays" in the celebrated trials?
1. AThat governments must fund companies that shorten the week.
2. ✓That some firms may keep the label but cut pay or lengthen each day.
3. CThat customers will face higher prices for the same products.
4. DThat employees may be charged fees to join a four-day schedule.
Answer
B
He writes that a struggling retailer "may keep the four-day label while stretching each remaining day to ten hours, or by trimming pay to match." Fees charged to employees, government funding, and higher customer prices are never mentioned; they name things absent from the passage.
9How does the writer respond to critics who fear the model will spread through pressure and momentum?
1. AHe dismisses the critics as uninformed.
2. BHe fully agrees and calls it the greatest danger.
3. ✓He considers the concern reasonable but overstated.
4. DHe ignores the concern entirely.
Answer
C
He writes, "I find this concern reasonable but overstated," noting competition for talent has always shaped benefits "and the sky has not fallen yet." "Greatest danger" overstates his view; "dismisses as uninformed" is too harsh; "ignores entirely" is false since he addresses it directly.
10What is the writer's tone in the final paragraph?
1. AAnxious and convinced the model will fail.
2. BSarcastic and dismissive of the whole concept.
3. ✓Cautiously open, willing to support the idea if it proves genuine.
4. DNeutral, offering no opinion at all.
Answer
C
He says "If the answers hold up, I will happily join the applause" while warning "enthusiasm is not evidence," showing conditional support. "Sarcastic and dismissive" and "convinced it will fail" contradict his willingness to applaud; "no opinion at all" is wrong because he clearly states conditions and hopes.

Three mistakes that cost points heremost common first

1Answering from your own opinion instead of the writer's.
2Mixing up two viewpoints that appear in adjacent paragraphs.
3Choosing a synonym that loses the writer's approval or disapproval.

Now do it yourself and find out where you land

You can check right and wrong on this page. What a page cannot do is tell you which question types you keep losing, under real timing.

Ready to practise for real?

Get exam-style questions, instant AI feedback on your Writing and Speaking, and a personalised path to your target CLB.

Create your free account →

See pricing

Questions people ask

What makes Reading Part 4 tricky?: It asks you to separate competing viewpoints and judge their strength. Attitude and opinion vocabulary is the key to keeping the positions straight.
Does Part 4 use difficult vocabulary?: It uses higher-CLB opinion and argument words. The entries below focus on exactly the stance language that Part 4 relies on.

The other 29 Viewpoints prompts2 free

·Distracted Driving in Canada
·Modernizing Canada's Military Justice System
·Reading for Viewpoints: Banning Single-Use Plastics
·Peer Pressure Among Canadian Teenagers
·Why Do We Dream?
·Remote Work vs. Returning to the Office — Reading for Viewpoints
·Medical Tourism
·Key Graduated Licensing Changes in B.C.
·Reading for Viewpoints: Government Subsidies for Electric Vehicles
·Vanishing Honeybees
·Reading for Viewpoints: Limiting Screen Time for Children
·Mom-and-Pop Shops in Canada
·The Hidden Cost of Fast Fashion in Canada
·The Modern Canadian Wedding
·Rethinking Retirement Savings
·Composting in Canada
·The Culture of Consumerism
·Reading for Viewpoints: Congestion Pricing Downtownfree
·Should Canada Ban Plastic Bags?
·Reading for Viewpoints: Year-Round Schooling
·Why Do Superstitions Survive?
·Reading for Viewpoints: Tuition-Free College
·Reading for Viewpoints: Banning Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers
·Reading for Viewpoints: Later Start Times for High Schools
·Reading for Viewpoints: Rethinking Tipping Culture
·Reading for Viewpoints: Plant-Based Default Cafeteria Meals
·Reading for Viewpoints: Urban Density vs. Suburban Sprawl
·Reading for Viewpoints: Mandatory Financial-Literacy Classes in Schools
·Reading for Viewpoints: Public Wi-Fi as a Public Utility

← All free practice Viewpoints lesson →Viewpoints vocabulary →CELPIP Reading format →Full mock exams →