In the past, buildings often reflected the culture of a society but today all modern buildings look alike and cities throughout the world are becoming more and more similar. What do you think is the reason for this, and is it a good think or a bad think? -
Sample Response
city has its architectural character, but the similarities between cities are more obvious these days than in the past. In my opinion, one reason for this is the high price of land. In most large cities, land is scarce and consequently it is very valuable. This has led to the construction of tall buildings which occupy only a small area of land while providing lots of floor space where people can live or work. Buildings of this type are made of concrete and steel and can be built comparatively quickly using prefabricated materials. They do not use local materials, such as stone, timber or brick, which used to give cities their individual character. In consequence many cities. now look very much the same and you might not know whether you were in Brisbane, Bangkok or Berlin when you are on the street. While I realise that we cannot stand in the way of progress, I believe that cities should try to keep some individuality. For example, in Paris it is prohibited to build very tall buildings in the centre of the city, as this would spoil the overall appearance of the skyline. Other cities have chosen to design unique buildings to ensure they look different. The twin towers in Kuala Lumpur or the Opera House in Sydney are examples of this approach, and I agree with this kind of initiative. All in all, although it is regrettable that modern cities look similar, I tend to feel that this is unavoidable. However, it can be argued that, even if the buildings are similar, cities will maintain their own character as a result of cultural diversity, the terrain and the climate, which ultimately determine how people live.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Add a determiner Original: city has Suggested revision: Each city has Why it matters: A singular countable noun needs a determiner, and the opening word should be capitalised.
- 2. Use more precise wording Original: similarities between cities are more obvious Suggested revision: similarities among cities are more apparent Why it matters: This phrasing is more natural when comparing many cities in a formal essay.
- 3. Improve the collocation Original: price Suggested revision: cost Why it matters: Cost of land is the more natural collocation for this economic factor.
- 4. Use a formal quantifier Original: lots of floor space Suggested revision: substantial floor space Why it matters: Substantial is more precise and appropriately formal than lots of.
- 5. Use a natural connector Original: In consequence Suggested revision: Consequently Why it matters: Consequently expresses the cause-and-effect link more idiomatically here.
- 6. Remove the stray stop Original: cities. now Suggested revision: cities now Why it matters: The full stop incorrectly divides the subject from the rest of its sentence.
- 7. Keep the tense consistent Original: were Suggested revision: are Why it matters: The present tense should match the later phrase when you are in this general statement.
- 8. Clarify the setting Original: when you are on the street Suggested revision: when walking along the street Why it matters: This wording describes the street-level experience more naturally.
- 9. Strengthen the collocation Original: keep Suggested revision: retain Why it matters: Retain individuality is a more precise formal collocation.
- 10. Use a stronger verb Original: I agree with this kind of initiative Suggested revision: I support this kind of initiative Why it matters: Support collocates more directly with an initiative than agree with does.
Suggested Rewrites
- city has Each city has
- similarities between cities are more obvious similarities among cities are more apparent
- price cost
- lots of floor space substantial floor space
- In consequence Consequently
- cities. now cities now
Why this response received Band 7.5
The response offers a persuasive, well-supported explanation of why modern buildings converge and develops a nuanced view that cities should retain individuality even when standardisation is difficult to avoid. Its main weakness is presentation as one continuous paragraph, which obscures the shift from causes to evaluation; separating the introduction, causal analysis, evaluation, and conclusion would make the already strong argument much easier to follow.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The response answers both questions directly, develops the land-value explanation convincingly, and sustains a clear, nuanced evaluation.
Strengthen the evaluation further by explicitly weighing the practical inevitability of standardisation against the value of preserving local identity.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas progress logically through cause, consequences, examples, and conclusion, but the entire response is presented as one continuous paragraph.
Use distinct paragraphs for the introduction, causal explanation, evaluation with examples, and conclusion so the argument's stages are immediately visible.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is varied, precise, and natural, with effective terms for architecture, urban development, and cultural identity.
Refine a few less exact expressions, such as the street-level comparison, to maintain consistently precise phrasing throughout.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of complex structures is handled accurately, with only isolated sentence-opening and punctuation slips.
Proofread the opening and sentence boundaries carefully to remove fragments, missing words, and stray full stops.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
In the past, buildings often reflected the culture of a society but today all modern buildings look alike and cities throughout the world are becoming more and more similar. What do you think is the reason for this, and is it a good think or a bad think? -
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.