Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-10-31

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)

In the salad days of millennium, the society is polarised into two groups of almost equallyregarding the notion that old buildings should be restored regardless the cost or should be replaced with new buildings. Different people have distinct mindset. The following paragraphs would shed light on both the approaches before making final note.

To commence with the first notion, there are myriad things to be shared in its favour. First and foremost, preserving old buildings would help in saving our history and culture. For instance, restorong art galleries would help to store paintings and portraits from history, which might provide knowledge to upcoming generation about the old art forms and the history shown in that art pieces. Moreover, historical buildings attracts tourism and creates business oppurtunities for local people, which helps in the economy of the origin also.

Shifting towards the second school of thought, other people argue that instead of wasting money on restoring old infrastructure, government should replace with the new modern buildings, because it will help in country development and will provide career to younger generation. Additionally, they think that tourism at historical places would be a burden on natural resources of that particular locality. Such as, more usage of water, more traffic which would create air and noise pollution and etc.

Having discussed the arguments and the counter-arguments, I would like to infer that for the sake of the development and economy of the country, government should demolish and replace the old buildings with updated infrastructure. Hammering the last nail, I personally feel that creating new and modern buildings would provide the local dwellers with more career and business chances.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses both views and gives a clear personal position: you explain the value of preserving history and tourism, then support replacing old buildings with modern infrastructure. The examples about art collections and tourism-related pressure on local resources are relevant. However, the two sides are not developed equally: the case for replacement is mainly asserted through “country development” and employment, without explaining how new buildings would achieve these outcomes or why they outweigh heritage and tourism benefits. Your conclusion repeats your preference but does not resolve this trade-off. To strengthen the response, explain the consequences of each option in more detail and support your final judgement with a specific example or a clearer comparison of costs and benefits.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a concluding opinion. Signposting such as “To commence with” and “Shifting towards” helps readers follow the discussion, and the main position is easy to locate. This meets the lower-band expectation of coherent organisation and shows some of the flexibility associated with stronger cohesion. However, several transitions sound formulaic, and the conclusion’s “Having discussed…” followed by “Hammering the last nail” repeats the same closing function. Some links between claims are also abrupt—for example, the move from tourism to local business opportunities is not explained. Use fewer stock phrases and connect each supporting point explicitly to the paragraph’s main idea.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You attempt a range of vocabulary, including “preserving,” “historical,” “infrastructure,” “career opportunities,” and “natural resources,” which is relevant to the topic. However, the range is not consistently controlled: some expressions are unnatural or imprecise, such as “salad days of millennium,” “distinct mindset,” and “economy of the origin.” There are also noticeable spelling and word-form errors, including “restorong,” “oppurtunities,” and “attracts” where the plural subject requires a different form. These choices sometimes make the reader pause, even though the central meaning is generally recoverable. Prefer straightforward, accurate collocations over ornate phrases, and proofread spelling and agreement between nouns and verbs.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response includes both simple and complex sentence forms, including clauses introduced by “which” and “because,” and most ideas remain understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly with agreement and sentence construction. For example, “historical buildings attracts tourism and creates business opportunities” has a plural subject with singular verbs, while “government should replace with the new modern buildings” lacks a clear object after “replace.” In “the society is polarised into two groups of almost equally,” the sentence is incomplete or incorrectly formed. The final paragraph also uses two conclusion sentences that could be combined more effectively. Review subject–verb agreement, articles, and the structure of clauses, then check that each sentence has a complete and clear grammatical pattern.

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.