Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-09-15

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 5.0)

It is widely believed that old infrastructure like halls and galleries should be renovate even it is very costly matter. In the opposition side they argued that it is law makers headache to local population to build new buildings. This essay will discuss both perspective before explaining why i believed a combination of approaches is the most effective solution.

On the one hand, construction of local old buildings is the way too keep them for lastings years. It will become historical parts of the town. For instance, upcoming generation will learn things from histoical monuements. Moreover, it can be very expensive project of renovating old buildings in convenient way.

On the other hand, indeviduals argued that replacing old buildings with modern infrastructure should become more be true accompanied of government. Government do this work without any restrictions from caurt. Such as, they wil get permissions and arrange all funds by themselves. Adequately, legislation do these type of constructions in convenient way in perticular areas.

In my oppion, thinking about old infrastructure is good thing for town to become modern but its difficult for public to start work because its costly project. But it is better to inform government to request for upgarde old building into new for better and beautiful home town and decorate them as a historical symbols of that area.

To sum up, converting old style builds into modern structure is helpful to keep past culture along eith new era. It will always remember us about our history and architechure of past,

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views—restoring old buildings versus replacing them with modern ones—and provides a clear personal opinion in the introduction and conclusion. However, the development of ideas is limited and at times unclear due to expression issues. For instance, the second body paragraph attempts to explain the preservation of historical monuments for upcoming generations, but the supporting points remain underdeveloped and somewhat repetitive. Phrases like 'in the opposition side they argued' show an attempt to present the counter-perspective, but the reasoning is muddled. While the prompt's requirements are met in terms of content coverage, the depth of argumentation aligns best with Band 5.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The essay is divided into five paragraphs, showing a basic attempt at structuring an academic essay with an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. However, overall progression is hindered by abrupt transitions and faulty cohesive devices. For example, 'On the opposition side they argued' is awkward and inaccurate for introducing a contrasting view. Referencing is frequently unclear, such as the pronoun 'it' in the opening sentence ('renovate even it is very costly matter') where the antecedent is ambiguous. Paragraphing is present, but the internal logical flow within paragraphs is disjointed, leading to a score of 5.0.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is basic and repetitive, frequently impeded by severe word choice and form errors. Examples include 'renovate' instead of 'renovated', 'lastings years' instead of 'lasting years', 'indoeviduals' for 'individuals', and 'oppion' for 'opinion'. There are also frequent spelling and collocation issues, such as 'law makers headache' and 'caurt' instead of 'court'. While the student attempts less common vocabulary like 'infrastructure' and 'monuments', the noticeable and frequent errors in word formation cause significant difficulty for the reader, placing this performance firmly at Band 4.5, rounded to 5.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.5

The student attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but control over grammar is weak. There are frequent errors in tense usage, subject-verb agreement, and clause structuring. Examples of ungrammatical constructions include 'should be renovate even it is very costly matter', 'Government do this work without any restrictions from caurt', and 'It will always remember us about our history'. Punctuation is also sparse or misused, and missing prepositions or articles occur in almost every sentence. Because these persistent errors frequently disrupt communication, the writing matches the Band 4 descriptors closely, though the presence of some recognisable clause attempts pulls it up to a 4.5, recorded here as 4.5.

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.