Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-10-19

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)

Some argue that old buildings such as town halls and art galleries should be restored, even though it is a costly process. Others, however, believe that they should be replaced with new, modern buildings. Although re-constructing them may reduce the risk of collapsing, I believe restoring can maintain their historial significance.

On the one hand, if governments replace old monuments with the new buildings, it may prevent them from being collapsed. Since several buidlings are very old and constructed a long time ago in the history, they fell down at any time. As a result, this may cause damage to the other nearby properties. Therefore, re-constructing them in a modern style and by using strong construction materials would give them a fresh life. Consequently, they can be preserved for more upcoming years.

On the other hand, if these buildings are renovated, their historical value and essence can be preserved for years. Many monuments were built by using traditional methods and with rare construction materials in the history. For instance, the Taj Mahal in India is known for its white marble used all over it and its unique, traditional style. If it is re-built all over again, it is likely to lose its historical significance. As a result, people may stop visiting these historial monuments because they are known for their architectural design. Therefore, in my opinion restoring them and maintaining their traditional value can be a better alternative.

In conclusion, even though re-building the old monuments can save them from damage, renovating them can preserve their historical value.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You discuss both positions and make your own view clear: replacing unsafe buildings may reduce the risk of collapse, while restoration can retain historical value. The Taj Mahal example supports your point about preserving distinctive materials and design. However, the safety argument is developed more briefly and generally than the restoration argument, and the response is 243 words, seven words below the required minimum; this limits the space available to explain and support your ideas. To strengthen the response, explain more specifically how modern replacement could address safety while acknowledging what might be lost, and extend the example or add a relevant supporting detail.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay has a clear overall structure: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a conclusion that restates the contrast. Linking phrases such as “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” make the progression easy to follow. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical because several sentences begin with “Therefore” or “As a result,” and the conclusion largely repeats the introduction rather than drawing the discussion together. Some references are also imprecise: “they” in the opening of the first body paragraph could refer to the buildings or monuments. Use a wider range of links and make references explicit to improve flow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “historical significance,” “traditional methods,” “construction materials,” and “architectural design.” These choices help communicate the central contrast between safety and heritage. However, several word-choice and spelling errors reduce precision, including “historial,” “buidlings,” and “re-constructing.” Some combinations are also unnatural: buildings do not “fell down at any time,” and “fresh life” is not the most suitable phrase for a replacement building. Aim for accurate spelling and more natural collocations, such as describing buildings as being at risk of collapse and saying that redevelopment can extend their useful life.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex forms, including conditional clauses (“if governments replace…”) and a concessive opening (“Although…”). Most sentences remain understandable, and the grammar does not generally obstruct your meaning. Some errors occur in verb forms and sentence patterns, however. For example, “it may prevent them from being collapsed” uses an awkward passive construction; “they fell down at any time” does not fit the intended general possibility; and “if it is re-built all over again” is an unnecessarily repetitive structure. Review how to express risk and possibility, and check that conditional clauses and their main clauses use suitable forms. Greater control of these patterns would make the argument smoother.

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.