Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-09-16

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)

There is an ongoing debate between the old and new buildings. Some citizens suggest to renovate and keep the old buildings whereas others say that money should be spend on constructing new buildings. I believe both aspects are right but importance should be given to new places.

First and foremost reason for restoring the old monuments is to reserve the history. Old places hold a lot of memories of that nation. Spending money on such buildings will give insights to people in the future. Secondly, the town halls and art galleries attract a lot of visitors which enhances the national economy. A recent article published in the magazine about the Egypt says that it is most preferred destination by the visitors because of the presence of old monuments.

On the other hand, using these spaces to contruct new buildings for the country will be very beneficial for the citizens. Making new workplaces, schools, colleges, stadiums will create more opportunites for the people to work, study or improve skills. It will lead to a counrty with more successful people. Moreover, replacing old places with new buildings will be less costly. After spending money once, there will be no need to do so again for next number of years. The money that is saved can be used for some other purposes.

According to me, there should be balance between both the new and old buildings. As old places reserve history and become tourist place whereas the new buildings are required to save money and develop the country.

In conclusion, governemnt should fund to keep some of the old buildings but more money should be spend on building new organization for the citizens for the development.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views—preserving old buildings versus constructing modern ones—and provides a clear personal opinion throughout the essay. The student presents relevant ideas, such as historical preservation and economic benefits via tourism for the first view, and economic efficiency, utility, and modern infrastructure development for the second view. However, some arguments are slightly under-developed or rely on generalisations without deeper explanation. For instance, the point about modern buildings being less costly and not needing repairs for a number of years is asserted rather than fully supported. Overall, the position is clear, and all core components of the prompt are successfully met, aligning well with the Band 6 descriptor criteria for addressing all parts of the task with relevant ideas.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear, logical progression from introduction to body paragraphs and conclusion. The writer uses basic cohesive devices adequately to signal transitions, such as 'First and foremost reason', 'Secondly', and 'On the other hand'. Paragraphing is utilised appropriately, with distinct sections for each viewpoint and the writer's stance. However, referencing and cohesion are sometimes mechanical or repetitive, and linking sentences occasionally lack smooth integration, as seen in the isolated sentence structure of the concluding paragraph. Despite these minor lapses, the logical organisation remains clear throughout the response, fitting comfortably into the Band 6 descriptor profile for coherence and cohesion.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully incorporating topic-related terms such as 'monuments', 'historical', 'infrastructure', and 'economy'. There are several attempts to use less common items and phrasing, such as 'ongoing debate' and 'enhances the national economy'. However, there are noticeable lexical and spelling inaccuracies throughout the text, including 'spend' instead of 'spent', 'contruct' instead of 'construct', 'opportunites', and 'counrty'. While these errors do not impede overall communication, they restrict the lexical score, as the writer's control over word choice and spelling falls short of the precision required for higher bands.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The response features a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating attempts at subordinate clauses and varied structures, such as 'Some citizens suggest to renovate...' and 'Spending money on such buildings will give insights...'. However, grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. There are several noticeable errors, including infinitive misuse ('suggest to renovate' instead of 'suggest renovating'), passive voice/tense errors ('money should be spend'), and missing articles ('destination by the visitors', 'governemnt should fund'). Punctuation and spacing issues also appear, such as double spaces. These errors occasionally disrupt the flow, but because meaning remains clear and a mixture of sentence types is present, the performance matches the Band 5.5 to 6.0 threshold, safely earning a Band 6.0.

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.