Band 8.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 8.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-08-26

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)

There is an ongoing debate about whether governments should spend large amounts of money restoring old buildings or replace them with modern structures. While constructing new buildings can provide greater functionality and efficiency, I believe that historically and culturally significant buildings should generally be preserved.

On the one hand, replacing old buildings with modern ones can have several advantages. First, contemporary buildings are usually designed to meet current safety standards and can incorporate advanced technology, energy-efficient systems and better accessibility. For example, an outdated town hall may have limited space, poor insulation and inadequate facilities for people with disabilities. Constructing a new building could address these problems while also providing more offices and meeting rooms. Furthermore, maintaining an old structure can be extremely expensive, particularly when extensive repairs are required. Governments could instead invest this money in essential public services such as healthcare, education and public transportation.

On the other hand, old buildings can have considerable historical, cultural and economic value. Buildings such as traditional town halls, museums and art galleries often represent an important part of a city’s identity and allow future generations to understand its history. Demolishing them would mean permanently losing a part of the community’s heritage. In addition, restored historical buildings can attract tourists, benefiting local businesses such as hotels, restaurants and shops. For instance, many European cities have successfully preserved historic buildings and turned them into major tourist attractions, generating significant economic activity.

In my opinion, governments should adopt a balanced approach rather than automatically choosing either restoration or demolition. Buildings with genuine historical or cultural significance should be preserved whenever restoration is financially and technically feasible. However, structures that have little heritage value and are unsafe or impractical to maintain should be replaced with modern alternatives. This would allow governments to protect cultural heritage without unnecessarily wasting public funds.

In conclusion, although modern buildings can offer greater efficiency and lower long-term maintenance costs, historically significant structures provide cultural and economic benefits that cannot easily be replaced. Therefore, governments should prioritize the restoration of valuable old buildings while replacing those that no longer serve a practical purpose.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 8.0

The response fully addresses all parts of the prompt. You have discussed both views—the benefits of modern construction and the value of historical preservation—and provided a clear, consistent personal opinion throughout the essay. The ideas are well-developed, particularly the contrast between functional efficiency and cultural identity. The conclusion effectively synthesizes your position, suggesting a balanced approach. The arguments are supported by relevant examples, such as the mention of European cities and the specific limitations of outdated town halls. The response is well-structured and directly answers the task requirements with a logical progression of thought.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 8.0

The essay demonstrates a clear logical progression throughout. Each paragraph has a central theme, and the transition between paragraphs is smooth, using effective cohesive devices such as 'On the one hand,' 'Furthermore,' and 'In addition.' The use of referencing is precise, and the paragraphing is logical, with a clear introduction, body paragraphs for each viewpoint, a nuanced opinion paragraph, and a conclusion. The flow of ideas is natural, and the relationship between sentences is clearly established, making the argument easy to follow. There is no evidence of mechanical or repetitive use of cohesive devices.

Lexical Resource — Band 8.0

You have used a wide and flexible range of vocabulary that is appropriate for the task. The language is precise and natural, with good use of collocations such as 'historically and culturally significant,' 'genuine historical or cultural significance,' and 'financially and technically feasible.' You demonstrate an ability to use less common lexical items effectively, such as 'demolishing,' 'inadequate,' and 'prioritize.' The word choice is consistently accurate, and there are no noticeable errors in spelling or word formation. The vocabulary contributes significantly to the clarity and sophistication of your argument.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 8.0

The essay displays a wide range of grammatical structures with high accuracy. You successfully use complex sentences, such as 'While constructing new buildings can provide greater functionality and efficiency, I believe that historically and culturally significant buildings should generally be preserved.' The majority of your sentences are error-free, and your control over punctuation and verb tenses is excellent. There are no significant grammatical errors that impede communication. The variety of sentence forms, including conditional structures and passive voice, demonstrates a high level of grammatical competence consistent with the band 8 descriptor.

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.