TCF Canada Writing Task 3: Two Views and a Model Answer

TCF Canada writing Task 3 asks you to compare two views from two documents and give your own position in 120 to 180 words. The official published sample divides that response into a 40-to-60-word presentation of the views and an 80-to-120-word opinion. Below you can practise that exact two-part instruction with original source texts and a fully counted answer.

Official instruction: compare, then take a position

FEI describes writing Task 3 as a text for an indicated audience that compares two points of view expressed in two documents and gives the candidate's opinion on their shared social issue. The task's overall range is 120 to 180 words. The whole TCF Canada writing section has three tasks in 60 minutes; those 60 minutes are not reserved for Task 3 alone. These details come from FEI's TCF Canada description and candidate manual.

FEI's published Task 3 sample gives a more specific two-part instruction: present the two views in your own words in 40 to 60 words, then give your position in 80 to 120 words. Our practice prompt follows that split. Always read the actual instruction you receive: the audience and topic in this exercise are invented. The sample's general instructions also define a word as a group of signs between two spaces, so contractions such as l'ouverture remain one space-separated group. The counts below use a simple split on whitespace as a transparent editing check, not a claim to reproduce FEI's counting process in every edge case.

Original practice documents

Situation: Your neighborhood association is preparing a short article about whether public libraries should open on Sundays. Read these two original, invented opinions. They are not extracts from any FEI exam.

Document 1 - in favor

Une bibliothèque ouverte le dimanche serait utile aux familles et aux personnes qui travaillent toute la semaine. Elles pourraient emprunter des livres, utiliser un ordinateur ou participer à un atelier sans se presser après le travail. Dans certains quartiers, ce serait aussi un lieu calme et gratuit pour étudier. La ville devrait donc essayer cette ouverture, au moins plusieurs dimanches par mois.

Document 2 - opposed

Ouvrir le dimanche coûterait plus cher à la commune et modifierait les horaires du personnel. Or, une bibliothèque a déjà besoin d'argent pour renouveler ses collections et entretenir ses locaux. Plutôt que d'ajouter une journée, la ville pourrait prolonger l'ouverture deux soirs en semaine. Les habitants auraient alors davantage de choix sans imposer un travail dominical régulier.

Your original practice instruction: Write a short article for the neighborhood association. In part one, present both opinions in your own words (40 to 60 words). In part two, give your position on Sunday library opening (80 to 120 words). Write 120 to 180 words in total. The part labels printed below are teaching labels, not words in the model response.

Complete model response, with checked counts

Part 1 - compare the two views (52 words)

Le premier document défend l'ouverture des bibliothèques le dimanche. Elle permettrait aux personnes occupées en semaine, notamment aux familles, d'emprunter des livres et de participer aux activités. Le second s'y oppose, car cette ouverture augmenterait les dépenses municipales et compliquerait les horaires du personnel. Il propose plutôt d'élargir certains créneaux en semaine.

Part 2 - give your position (113 words)

À mon avis, une ouverture dominicale limitée serait préférable à une règle identique pour toutes les bibliothèques. Dans les quartiers où beaucoup d'habitants travaillent du lundi au samedi, quelques dimanches par mois pourraient faciliter l'accès aux livres, aux ordinateurs et aux ateliers. Cependant, cette mesure ne doit pas reposer sur des employés contraints d'abandonner systématiquement leur jour de repos. La ville pourrait demander l'avis du personnel, prévoir une rotation volontaire et comparer la fréquentation avec le coût réel. Si les résultats sont faibles, des soirées plus longues en semaine seraient une meilleure solution. L'objectif n'est pas d'ouvrir à tout prix, mais de rendre le service accessible sans négliger ceux qui le font vivre.

Count check: 52 words in part one + 113 in part two = 165 words total, within this practice prompt's three ranges. We counted each whitespace-separated group in the two French answer paragraphs, excluding the teaching headings, prompt, and source documents. This simple check is easy to reproduce, but it is not an official counting tool. Leave a margin inside each required range when you draft your own answer.

What the two parts are doing

Part one is synthesis, not a vote. Le premier document défend... and Le second s'y oppose... attribute ideas to their sources. The paragraph identifies the real disagreement: access outside working hours versus cost and staff scheduling. It does not copy full sentences from either document or announce which side is correct. Mentioning both the opposition and its alternative of longer weekday evenings makes the comparison fair.

Part two is your own argument. À mon avis marks the transition. The writer supports a limited Sunday option, gives a concrete use case, recognizes the effect on employees, and proposes a way to test the policy. The conditional Si les résultats sont faibles... shows what evidence could change the recommendation. You do not have to agree completely with either source; you do have to make your position clear and relevant to both.

The register suits a short association article: clear and measured, without slang or a private greeting. Phrases such as cette mesure refer back to the proposed Sunday opening, while ceux qui le font vivre refers to the staff. Check that pronouns still have clear referents when you revise your own answer. For more ways to connect a concession to a recommendation, see our French argument connectors guide.

A quick revision exercise

Before reading the answers, revise these invented sentences. In each case, identify whether the problem is meaning, agreement, or register.

1. Les deux documents sont d'accord : la bibliothèque doit ouvrir le dimanche.
2. Le deuxième texte proposent des horaires plus tard en semaine.
3. Les employés n'ont qu'à travailler le dimanche, ce n'est pas grave.

Suggested revisions and why

1. Les deux documents présentent des avis opposés sur l'ouverture du dimanche. The original changes the source meaning: one document opposes Sunday opening.
2. Le deuxième texte propose des horaires plus tardifs en semaine. The singular subject texte takes propose; plus tardifs modifies horaires.
3. Cette proposition doit aussi tenir compte des horaires et du repos du personnel. The revision replaces dismissive language with a measured consideration that fits the audience.

Use the model as a check, not a template to copy

On a fresh topic, underline each source's main claim and one supporting reason. Draft the comparison without looking back at the exact wording, then write your own position with a reason, an example, and a limitation. Count each part separately before checking the total. Finally, reread for attribution (whose view is this?), agreement, verb forms, and an ending that actually answers the question. These steps are study advice, not an official scoring rubric or a promise of a particular result.

The companion speaking Task 3 guide treats an argument made without preparation, not a two-document written comparison. For the complete test structure, use our TCF Canada format guide. InfinLume's current TCF Canada practice covers reading and listening; it does not score this written answer.