Band 8.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 8.0 · 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 8.0)

Many people believe that old public buildings, such as town halls and art galleries, should be preserved and restored despite the considerable expense involved. Others argue that it is more practical for governments to demolish these structures and replace them with modern buildings. While both views have valid arguments, I believe that historically or culturally significant buildings should generally be restored, provided that restoration is safe and economically reasonable.

On the one hand, replacing old buildings with modern alternatives can offer several advantages. Older structures may have serious problems, including deteriorating foundations, outdated electrical systems, poor energy efficiency, and limited accessibility for people with disabilities. Repairing these issues can sometimes cost more than constructing an entirely new building. Modern buildings can also be designed to meet current environmental and safety standards. For example, a newly constructed town hall could include energy-efficient heating systems, wheelchair access, and technology that allows local government services to operate more effectively. Therefore, in cases where an old building is unsafe or has little historical value, replacement may be the most practical solution.

On the other hand, restoring old buildings helps protect a country’s history and cultural identity. Historic town halls, museums, galleries, and other public structures often represent important periods in a community’s development. Once they are demolished, their original architectural character and historical significance cannot truly be replaced. Furthermore, restored heritage buildings can attract tourists and contribute to the local economy. Many cities, for instance, preserve historic districts because visitors are interested in experiencing traditional architecture and learning about the area’s past.

In my opinion, governments should carefully evaluate each building rather than automatically choosing either restoration or replacement. Buildings with significant historical, cultural, or architectural importance should be restored whenever possible. However, if restoration would create serious safety risks or require an unreasonable amount of public money, constructing a modern replacement may be justified. In some situations, governments could also combine old and new elements by preserving the building’s historic exterior while modernizing its interior.

In conclusion, replacing old buildings can provide practical benefits such as improved safety, accessibility, and energy efficiency. Nevertheless, restoration is often worthwhile because historic buildings preserve cultural heritage and may also provide economic benefits through tourism. I therefore believe that governments should prioritize restoration for genuinely significant buildings while replacing structures that are unsafe or impractical to preserve.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 8.0

The response fully addresses all parts of the prompt. You have discussed both perspectives—the practical benefits of modern construction and the cultural importance of restoration—and provided a clear, balanced personal opinion throughout the essay. The ideas are well-developed, with relevant examples such as energy efficiency and tourism. The conclusion effectively synthesizes your position, and the argument remains consistent from the introduction to the final paragraph. The response is well-structured and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the task requirements, meeting all criteria for a high band score.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 8.0

The essay is logically organized with a clear progression of ideas. Each paragraph has a central theme, and the transition between the two viewpoints is smooth, using effective cohesive devices such as 'On the one hand,' 'On the other hand,' and 'Nevertheless.' The use of referencing is precise, and the paragraphing is logical and appropriate for the task. The flow of information is natural, and the relationship between sentences is clearly established, making the text easy to follow throughout.

Lexical Resource — Band 8.0

You demonstrate a wide and flexible range of vocabulary. You use precise terms such as 'deteriorating foundations,' 'architectural character,' and 'economically reasonable' with ease. The language is natural and sophisticated, showing a good awareness of collocation and style. There are no significant errors in word choice, and the vocabulary is well-suited to the formal tone required for an IELTS essay. The range of vocabulary is sufficient to convey complex ideas clearly and accurately.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 8.5

The essay displays a wide range of grammatical structures, including complex sentences and conditional clauses (e.g., 'if restoration would create...'). The majority of sentences are error-free, and your control over punctuation and syntax is excellent. There are no noticeable grammatical slips, and the writing is highly accurate throughout. The variety of sentence forms contributes to the overall fluency and readability of the response, demonstrating a high level of grammatical competence.

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.