English guide
Get a Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 sample answer on historic buildings. See scoring breakdown, vocabulary, and common mistakes to avoid.
What this guide covers
Search answer
Get a Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 sample answer on historic buildings. See scoring breakdown, vocabulary, and common mistakes to avoid.
Related guides:
Some people think that governments should spend money on saving old buildings. Other people believe that money should be spent on building new ones. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Write at least 250 words.
Some people believe that governments should spend money on preserving historic buildings, while others think new buildings are more important. I agree that old buildings should be protected.
Firstly, old buildings are part of our history. If we don't save them, future generations won't be able to learn about the past. For example, many ancient temples in Asia are very important to the culture and should be preserved. Besides, old buildings often have beautiful architecture that new buildings don't have. Tourists visit these places and this helps the local economy.
However, some people say that new buildings are more important. They argue that modern buildings have better facilities and are safer. For instance, many old buildings need repairs and this costs a lot of money. But I think even if we spend money to fix them, it is worth it. We can't build new buildings that have the same history and cultural value.
In conclusion, I believe governments should spend money on saving old buildings. They are important for our history and culture. New buildings are important too, but not as important as historic ones.
The debate over whether governments should allocate funds to protect historic buildings or construct new ones is ongoing. Both perspectives have merits, but I firmly believe in prioritizing the preservation of old buildings.
On one hand, proponents of new construction argue that modern infrastructure is essential for economic growth and improved quality of life. They contend that outdated buildings often pose safety hazards and require costly maintenance. For example, many cities face the challenge of upgrading their infrastructure to accommodate growing populations. Additionally, new buildings can be more energy-efficient, aligning with contemporary environmental concerns.
On the other hand, historic buildings offer unique cultural and educational value. They serve as tangible links to our past, providing insights into the architectural styles, social norms, and historical events of earlier eras. For instance, the ancient coliseums of Rome and the Great Wall of China are not only tourist attractions but also invaluable educational resources. Preserving these structures fosters a sense of national identity and pride. Furthermore, restoring old buildings can stimulate local economies through tourism and related industries.
In conclusion, while the need for new buildings is undeniable, the cultural and historical significance of old buildings warrants greater investment. Governments should strive to balance both priorities, ensuring that the rich heritage encapsulated in historic buildings is not lost to future generations.
The discourse surrounding the allocation of governmental funds for the preservation of historic buildings versus the construction of new ones is multifaceted. While both viewpoints present compelling arguments, I am inclined to advocate for the prioritization of historic preservation, albeit with a nuanced approach.
Advocates for new construction posit that modern buildings are imperative for urban development and technological advancement. They argue that contemporary infrastructure is better equipped to meet the demands of a growing population, offering enhanced safety features, improved accessibility, and greater energy efficiency. For example, the advent of smart cities necessitates the integration of cutting-edge technology into urban planning. Additionally, new buildings can be designed to be more environmentally sustainable, addressing the pressing issue of climate change.
Conversely, the preservation of historic buildings is paramount for cultural heritage and educational enrichment. These structures are often irreplaceable repositories of artistic and architectural prowess, reflecting the socio-cultural ethos of their time. For instance, the intricate carvings of the Taj Mahal and the Gothic arches of Notre-Dame Cathedral are testament to the ingenuity of past civilizations. Moreover, historic buildings often serve as tourist magnets, contributing significantly to local economies through tourism-related revenue.
In my view, a balanced approach is essential. Governments should allocate funds for the preservation of historic buildings while also investing in new construction to meet contemporary needs. This dual strategy ensures that the rich tapestry of our past is preserved, while also paving the way for a sustainable future. By integrating modern technology into the restoration of old buildings, we can create a harmonious blend of the old and the new, fostering a sense of continuity and progress.
Task Response (4.0-5.0): The answer presents a clear position but the development is limited. The arguments are somewhat relevant but lack depth and complexity.
Coherence and Cohesion (5.0-6.0): The response is logically organized but the connections between ideas are somewhat mechanical. There is a mix of simple and complex sentences, but the flow is not always smooth.
Lexical Resource (5.0-6.0): The vocabulary is adequate but somewhat limited. There are some attempts at using less common vocabulary, but the range is restricted and there are some inaccuracies.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy (5.0-6.0): The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, but there are frequent grammatical errors and punctuation mistakes.
Task Response (6.0-7.0): The answer presents a clear position with relevant, extended arguments. The response is well-developed and supported with appropriate examples.
Coherence and Cohesion (7.0-8.0): The response is logically organized and the connections between ideas are clear. The use of cohesive devices is effective, and the flow is generally smooth.
Lexical Resource (7.0-8.0): The vocabulary is sufficiently varied and appropriate. There is a good range of vocabulary, with some less common lexical items used appropriately.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy (7.0-8.0): The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, with generally good control of grammar and punctuation. There are some errors, but they do not impede understanding.
Task Response (7.0-8.0): The answer presents a clear position with relevant, extended, and supported arguments. The response is well-developed and supported with appropriate examples and a clear conclusion.
Coherence and Cohesion (8.0-9.0): The response is logically organized and the connections between ideas are clear and sophisticated. The use of cohesive devices is effective, and the flow is smooth and easy to follow.
Lexical Resource (8.0-9.0): The vocabulary is sufficiently varied and precise. There is a wide range of vocabulary, with less common lexical items used appropriately and naturally.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy (8.0-9.0): The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, with a high degree of grammatical accuracy and a wide range of structures. There are only occasional errors, and they do not impede understanding.
Ready to see how you score? Upload your own response to the historic buildings prompt on English AIdol and get instant AI feedback.