List each named person or group and mark their stance in two words.
CELPIP wiki
CELPIP Reading Part 4: Reading for Viewpoints
Part 4 closes the section with its densest text: an article where several people hold different positions, then a reader's comment with blanks. Whose view is whose - and what would this commenter say - are the whole game.
Quick answer
Tag the owner of every opinion before the options blur them.
Short answer: CELPIP Reading Part 4 (Reading for Viewpoints) presents a news-style article in which several people — the author, officials, residents, experts — hold different positions, followed by 10 questions: several on the viewpoints and the rest completing a reader’s comment. Tag the owner of every opinion as you read, and complete the comment blanks in the commenter’s established voice, not the article’s.
This is the reading twin of the listening viewpoints part, at the end of the section for the same reason: attribution under fatigue. The options recombine real positions with wrong owners.
Strategy
A practical Part 4 routine that protects section timing
What the writer asserts versus what they quote others saying.
Read the comment's intact sentences first; they establish its position.
Every blank continues the commenter's stance - not the article's balance.
Question pattern
Real opinions, wrong owners: the Part 4 distractor formula
A wrong option is rarely an invented view; it is the resident's complaint attributed to the official, or the author's caveat presented as the expert's conclusion. A two-word stance map next to each name converts these options from confusing to checkable.
What the 10 questions test
Which person holds which view, why they hold it, what the author concedes, and whether you can extend a commenter's position consistently through the blanks.
What to review after practice
For each miss, check the stance map: was the view assigned to the wrong owner, or did a comment blank drift from the commenter's voice into the article's?
Common mistakes
Part 4 answers usually weaken in the same three ways
Reading without tagging
Four positions absorbed as one general impression cannot answer who-thinks-what questions.
Merging author and sources
The writer's own claim versus what they report others saying is a distinction most options exploit.
Completing the comment neutrally
Blanks get filled with balanced-sounding options while the commenter has taken a clear side.
What to do next
Run one timed attempt, then review the evidence, not the score
Practice this part under timing
Run Part 4 inside a timed reading set so the routine and the section clock get tested together.
Open reading practiceReview with explanations
After the attempt, use evidence-based explanations to see exactly which sentence eliminates each wrong option.
Open reading explanationsFAQ
Part 4 questions
How many questions does CELPIP Reading Part 4 have?
Ten, the second-largest reading part: viewpoint questions on the article plus blanks completing a reader's comment.
What makes Part 4 the hardest reading part for many candidates?
Density, position in the section, and attribution: several stakeholders hold overlapping-but-different views, and options recombine them. Time pressure from earlier parts compounds it.
How do I complete the reader's comment blanks?
Establish the commenter's stance from the intact sentences first, then choose options that continue that stance. An option that contradicts the commenter's established position is wrong even when it matches the article.