Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-10-01

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)

Old buildings and art galleries are the art of historic nature. I do believe that restoring old buildings, town halls, and art galleries is a must because it gives a sense of acceptance and recognition. Historic buildings carry an irreplaceable identity, showing unique craftmanship, local materials, and architectural histories that modern construction cannot replicate.

Beyond cultural preservation, this practice offers substantial economic and environmental benefits such as environmental sustainability, restoring existing structures significantly reduces the carbon footprint, energy consumption and waste generation. Other factor is urban revitalization, transforming neglected or abandoned historic sites into cultural hubs stimulates local economies, boosts tourism and foster a renewes sense of community pride.

Some other arguments for replacing with other modern buildings are cost efficiency, repairing okd decaying structures can ve very expensive compared to building new ones. On the other hand better utility,modern buildings offer updated safety standards, energy effiecy and better space for growing populations. Fast growing cities often need more residential and commercial space then historical sites can provide.

To conclude, i would like to add that old buildings such as townhalls and art galeries should not be replaced as it gives a sense of recognition.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views on historic restoration versus modern replacement and providing a personal opinion, which satisfies the basic requirements of the prompt. However, the ideas are somewhat limited and under-developed, particularly the arguments regarding modern buildings which lack sufficient extension and support. Furthermore, it is critical to note a major limitation: the response falls significantly short of the required word count, containing only 195 words compared to the minimum 250-word requirement. This lack of length restricts the depth of the discussion and prevents full exploration of the topic, keeping the task response score at this level.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay demonstrates a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt to structure the response into introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. There is a logical progression of ideas, moving from cultural and economic benefits of restoration to the counterarguments supporting modern construction. However, cohesion is sometimes faulty or mechanical. For instance, transitional phrases and referencing are occasionally abrupt, and the paragraphing shows minor issues where distinct arguments are bundled together rather than clearly separated. While the overall structure can be followed easily, the management of cohesive devices lacks the flexibility and skill required to reach a higher band.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, successfully conveying the writer's basic points regarding heritage and modern infrastructure. The student attempts less common vocabulary with varying degrees of success, using phrases such as 'urban revitalization' and 'carbon footprint'. However, there are noticeable word choice and spelling errors throughout the text, such as 'craftmanship' instead of 'craftsmanship', 'renewes' instead of 'renewed', 'okd' instead of 'old', 've' instead of 'be', and 'effiecy' instead of 'efficiency'. Additionally, some collocations are slightly unnatural, like 'art of historic nature'. These errors do not seriously impede communication, but they highlight the limitations in lexical control.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response exhibits a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating an attempt to use varied structures such as relative clauses and conditional-like phrasing. However, there are several errors in grammar and punctuation that prevent higher achievement. There are punctuation and capitalization slips, such as 'i would like', comma splices in compound statements like 'such as environmental sustainability, restoring existing structures significantly reduces', and prepositional inaccuracies. While these errors rarely impede communication, the frequency of basic mechanical and structural slips, combined with a somewhat limited range of faultless complex structures, keeps the grammatical performance at this level.

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.