TCF Canada Writing Task 2: Experience, Opinion and Models

TCF Canada writing Task 2 asks for more than a sequence of events. In 120 to 150 words, you recount an experience or story for several readers and add comments, opinions or arguments that serve the instruction's goal. These two original models show an article recommending a repeat event and a letter requesting a change after a disappointing start.

What makes Task 2 different from Task 1?

According to FEI's Canada-specific description and candidate manual, Task 2 is an article, letter, note or similar text for several recipients. It recounts an experience or story, and the account is accompanied by comments, opinions or arguments for a stated objective. The Canada range is 120 to 150 words. The three-task writing section lasts 60 minutes overall, with no official per-task minute allowance specified in these sources. Do not substitute the shorter TCF IRN ranges.

The key question is not just What happened? but Why am I telling these readers, and what should they think or do? A short chronology gives your argument something concrete to stand on. A comment interprets the experience; a recommendation, request or other conclusion connects it to the prompt's objective. An empty opinion such as C'était bien is less useful than a reason tied to what happened.

Original practice prompt 1: an article for neighbors

Situation: Your neighborhood association held a repair workshop. Write an article for its newsletter, read by local residents. Recount your experience, evaluate what worked and what did not, and recommend whether and how the association should hold another workshop. This invented event is not an FEI exam example.

Complete model article A

Un atelier de réparation à renouveler
Samedi dernier, notre quartier a organisé son premier atelier de réparation dans la salle commune. Je suis venu avec une lampe qui ne fonctionnait plus. Deux bénévoles m'ont montré comment vérifier le câble, puis nous avons remplacé une pièce abîmée. En une heure, la lampe éclairait de nouveau. Plusieurs voisins ont aussi réparé des vêtements et un petit vélo.
L'expérience m'a plu parce que chacun pouvait poser des questions sans se sentir jugé. Cependant, l'attente était longue et aucun panneau n'indiquait quelles réparations étaient possibles. Pour la prochaine séance, je propose un système d'inscription et une liste du matériel accepté. Cela aiderait les bénévoles à se préparer et éviterait aux habitants un déplacement inutile. J'espère que notre association renouvellera cet atelier chaque mois : il crée des rencontres tout en réduisant le gaspillage.

Audience, purpose and structure: The title and notre quartier address neighborhood readers rather than a single friend. The lamp story is concrete: problem, help and result. The second paragraph evaluates the welcome and the long wait, then recommends registration and a list of accepted items. The final sentence asks for a repeat event and gives two reasons. This is an argument built from an experience, not a detached list of advantages.

Original practice prompt 2: a letter to a club committee

Situation: You joined a sports club's discovery walk for new members. The walk itself was pleasant, but the guide arrived late and the group received no update. Write to the club committee, whose members will read your letter together. Recount what happened, acknowledge what worked and request a practical communication change for future outings. This is a different objective and audience from the newsletter article.

Complete model letter B

Mesdames, Messieurs,
Je vous écris après la sortie de découverte organisée dimanche pour les nouveaux membres du club. Nous étions quinze au rendez-vous, mais le guide est arrivé quarante minutes après l'heure annoncée. Pendant l'attente, personne ne savait si la marche aurait lieu. Une fois partis, nous avons suivi un itinéraire agréable et le guide a répondu patiemment à nos questions.
Cette expérience m'a permis de rencontrer d'autres membres, et je souhaite continuer les activités. Pourtant, l'absence d'information au départ a découragé plusieurs participants, notamment ceux qui avaient d'autres obligations. Pour les prochaines sorties, pourriez-vous nommer une personne chargée de prévenir le groupe en cas de retard ? Un message collectif et un lieu d'attente clairement indiqué suffiraient. Nous pourrions ainsi profiter du programme sans inquiétude. Je vous remercie de l'attention portée à cette proposition.
Cordialement,
Hugo Martin

Audience, purpose and structure: Mesdames, Messieurs addresses committee members collectively; vous keeps a courteous register. The first paragraph gives the delay and the uncertainty, then recognizes that the walk and guide were good. The second explains the effect on participants and requests one feasible change. Because the goal is improvement, the letter avoids an exaggerated accusation and ends with a specific proposal.

How the model counts were checked

FEI's published writing sample describes one word as a group of signs between two spaces. Here we use a reproducible whitespace split across the entire French response. For the article, that includes the title. For the letter, it includes the salutation, closing and two-word name. HTML line breaks act as spaces. The English prompts and headings such as “Complete model article A” are teaching labels and are not counted. This editing check is not an official FEI counting tool.

Model	Whole-response count	Official Task 2 range
A, newsletter article	139 words	120 to 150 words
B, committee letter	138 words	120 to 150 words

These examples have less room above their counts than Task 1 does. During practice, you might target a comfortable interior count before polishing and then recount after adding a title, greeting or sign-off. If you need to shorten, preserve the link between event, evaluation and objective. A title is useful in an article but not a substitute for a conclusion.

Editing exercise: from account to purposeful text

Revise these invented lines so that each would better serve its stated Task 2 prompt. Try to identify whether the main problem is a missing argument, an unsupported claim, register or agreement.

1. J'ai réparé ma lampe. C'était bien. Il faut recommencer.
2. Tous les habitants ont adoré l'atelier, donc aucun changement n'est nécessaire.
3. Votre guide était nul et votre club ne sait rien organiser.
4. Plusieurs participants a attendu sans information.

Suggested revisions and why

1. J'ai pu réparer ma lampe grâce aux bénévoles ; un nouvel atelier aiderait d'autres habitants à apprendre ces gestes. The revision connects a specific outcome to the recommendation. “Good” alone does not explain why to repeat the event.
2. L'atelier a été utile pour plusieurs voisins, mais une liste des objets acceptés rendrait la prochaine séance plus claire. The writer can report observed participation without claiming to know what all residents thought. The qualification leads to a practical improvement.
3. Le retard du guide aurait été plus facile à gérer si le groupe avait reçu un message. This identifies the service problem without insulting the committee or ignoring the successful part of the walk.
4. Plusieurs participants ont attendu sans information. The plural subject takes ont, not a.

A five-point self-review

1. Check the public. Is this for newsletter readers, a committee, colleagues or another group named in the instruction? Choose a format and register that fit those readers.
2. Check the event. Can a new reader tell what happened, where or when it mattered, and what the result was? Avoid a chronology that consumes the whole word allowance.
3. Check the interpretation. Does at least one comment or reason grow from your account rather than appear as an unrelated slogan?
4. Check the objective. If the instruction asks you to recommend, request, reconcile or persuade, is that action visible in your ending? The objective varies by prompt; do not paste in the same conclusion every time.
5. Check language and length. Repair agreement and tense, count every submitted French word, and leave a margin within 120 to 150. This workflow is study advice, not an official scoring rubric or a promised result.

For a message to one or more specified recipients without this experience-plus-objective requirement, see our writing Task 1 guide. Argument connectors can help you link a reservation to a recommendation, but do not add them mechanically. Writing Task 3 instead compares two documents and gives your view. InfinLume's current TCF Canada practice covers reading and listening; it does not correct or score these written responses.