Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-08-25

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 6.0)

Many folks argue that old buildings like townhalls or art galleries should be restored to its original form, while others believe that money is well spent on modern infrastructure instead.While restoring these buildings can be costly it can be a good tourist attraction as people enjoy vintage buildings.However, building new infrastructure such as libraries or gymnasium could benfit a more to the citizens. This eassay will disscuss the both arguements and explain why new infrastucture would be more helpful for longterm growth of the society.

There are many people who belive that restoring old building and infrastrucure can be really helpfull as a tourist attraction even though might be little more costly. Mainly when tourist visit any place or city they mainly enjoy visiting heritage sites of that perticular city, peopel enjoy visiting traditional landmarks of differnt cities. Having this tourists visit these landmarks can generate a good revenuwe for the government.

On the other hand, Instead of investing in rennovation which is a huge yearly cost, government can simply build new infrastrucure that focuses on citizens needs. Like building a library or building a gymnasium where youngsters can hone there skills would benifit more to citizens directly.

I personally believe that, have new infrastructure is more helpfull as it doesn't require rennovations every year which can be very costly and time consuming. these buildns can now directly help citizens as government can built new buildings based on the needs of there natives.

To conclude, although renovating old building can create a good income from visitors. Having new commmodities specially desigend for the citizens is more helpfull.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response addresses both sides of the argument and provides a clear personal opinion. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited. For instance, the argument for restoration focuses solely on tourism, and the argument for new buildings focuses on general needs without specific examples of how these buildings impact long-term growth. The ideas are relevant but lack depth and detailed support. The position is consistent throughout, but the essay would benefit from more thorough exploration of the implications of each approach to reach a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The essay is organised into logical paragraphs, and there is a clear progression of ideas. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'On the other hand' and 'To conclude', though some transitions feel a bit mechanical. Referencing is generally clear, although there are occasional issues with pronoun agreement (e.g., 'these buildns can now directly help citizens'). Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the different viewpoints and the conclusion. Overall, the flow of the essay is logical and easy to follow.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The vocabulary is adequate for the task but lacks variety and precision. There are frequent spelling errors such as 'eassay', 'disscuss', 'arguements', 'infrastucture', 'belive', 'helpfull', 'perticular', 'revenuwe', 'rennovation', 'buildns', and 'commmodities'. These errors are noticeable and detract from the overall quality of the writing. While the student attempts to use topic-specific vocabulary like 'heritage sites' and 'infrastructure', the range is limited, and the repetition of basic words like 'helpfull' and 'building' prevents a higher score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors throughout. Issues include subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'have new infrastructure is more helpfull'), incorrect word forms (e.g., 'government can built'), and missing articles. Punctuation is also inconsistent, particularly with comma usage and sentence boundaries. While the meaning is generally clear, the high frequency of errors in basic grammar and sentence construction limits the score. More attention to proofreading for subject-verb agreement and verb tense consistency is required.

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.