Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-08-10

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Some people believe that old buildings, such as town halls and art galleries, should be restored, even though this can be costly. Others argue that governments should replace them with new, modern buildings.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 6.5)

In recent times, people hold contrasting perspective regarding restoration. While a segment of society contends that old buildings should be restored, other maintain that contemporary architecture should replace traditional properties. I ultimately side with restoration over the replacement of the structures.

On the one hand, proponents of renovation argue that preserving historic architecture preserves the cultural identity and boosts economic value via tourism. The primary rationale behind this perspective is that modern development has impacted the loss of culture for several communities, as a result the historic landmark, such as town halls and art galleries that are constructed several decades or centuries ago stands as symbol of representation of the society that resided in the area. Additionally, the modern buildings cannot replicate the sense of identity, this distinct character draws tourist, generating revenue for local businesses and hospitality. Consequently why many individuals advocates for the restoration of old buildings such as cathedrals and churches.

On the other hand, advocates for replacement of the old building with a contemporary architectural structures, the side contends that restoring aging structures often requires skilled and expensive craftsmanship and frequent inspection and repairs. In contrast, new building utilize space better, feature superior accessibility and incorporate smart resource allocation. Considering the fact that several ancient buildings are non-essential and severely damaged, that cannot be utilized for tourism, replacing modern infrastructure can allow growth of priority sectors such as healthcare and education, making it far more compelling argument.

In conclusion, while valid points can be raised in favor of replacing the historic building , I firmly believe that restoration of the historic landmarks help to preserves the cultural identity of the community that build over the the year and consequently attracts tourism which helps the community in socio-economic growth.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 7.0

The response addresses all parts of the prompt, discussing both views and providing a clear personal opinion. The position is consistent throughout the essay. Ideas are generally well-developed, such as the link between historic preservation and economic growth through tourism. However, some arguments could be more thoroughly supported; for instance, the claim that modern buildings offer 'smart resource allocation' is mentioned but not expanded upon. The essay maintains a formal tone and meets the requirements of the task effectively, though it could benefit from more nuanced examples to reach a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 7.0

The essay is logically organized with a clear introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the two opposing viewpoints. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'On the one hand', 'In contrast', and 'Consequently', which help guide the reader. However, there are some minor issues with flow and referencing; for example, the phrase 'Consequently why many individuals advocates' is grammatically awkward and disrupts the cohesion. Overall, the progression of ideas is clear, and the structure supports the argument well.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.5

The vocabulary is generally appropriate for the task, with some good topic-specific collocations like 'cultural identity', 'contemporary architecture', and 'socio-economic growth'. There are some minor errors in word choice and form, such as 'people hold contrasting perspective' (should be 'perspectives') and 'advocates' (should be 'advocate'). While the range is sufficient to convey ideas with precision, the essay lacks a wider variety of less common lexical items that would demonstrate a more sophisticated command of the language. The errors present do not impede communication.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While there is an attempt at complex grammar, there are several persistent errors in subject-verb agreement and article usage, such as 'the historic landmark... stands' (should be 'landmarks... stand') and 'the the year'. Some sentences are slightly clunky, such as 'the side contends that restoring aging structures often requires...'. Despite these errors, the meaning remains clear throughout, and the grammatical mistakes do not significantly hinder the reader's understanding. A greater focus on proofreading for basic agreement errors would improve the score.

See this exact question answered at other band scores — the same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.