Some people believe that old buildings should be protected by law. Others, however, think that they should be replaced by new buildings. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Response
In today's world, the debate over the fate of old buildings continues to be a contentious issue. Some people argue that old buildings should be preserved and protected by law, while others maintain that these buildings should be replaced by new ones. This essay will examine both views and provide reasons why I believe that old buildings, that are important and have historic significance should be protected by law.
On the one hand, those who advocate for new buildings in place of old ones contend that old buildings are often outdated and pose a danger to public safety. These buildings may have faulty electrical systems, weak structures, and outdated plumbing, making them unsuitable for habitation. In addition, they argue that new buildings are more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly, reducing the carbon footprint and making cities more sustainable. For instance, despite their historic significance, many old structures in Japan were replaced by modern buildings to ensure safety against earthquakes.
On the other hand, those who support the preservation of old buildings argue that they have a significant cultural and historical value that cannot be replaced. Old buildings often serve as a tangible link to the past, showcasing the architectural and design trends of a particular time period. These buildings also have a unique character and charm that new buildings simply cannot replicate. Furthermore, preserving old buildings can help to maintain the identity of a city or region and attract tourists, contributing to the local economy. For instance, old towns and their medieval structures are often the main tourist attractions in our country.
In my opinion, old buildings should be protected by law. While it is true that some old buildings may need significant renovations to ensure their safety and functionality, it is important to preserve the historical and cultural significance of important old buildings. The loss of old buildings can result in the erasure of a city's cultural and architectural heritage, which is irreplaceable.
In conclusion, while there are valid arguments for both sides of the debate, I believe that old buildings should be protected by law. This will ensure that their cultural and historical significance is preserved for future generations, while also contributing to boost tourism.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Fix relative clause Original: old buildings, that are important and have historic significance should Suggested revision: old buildings that are important and historically significant should Why it matters: A restrictive that-clause should not be separated by a comma, and the revised adjective phrase is parallel.
- 2. Remove article Original: a significant cultural and historical value Suggested revision: significant cultural and historical value Why it matters: Value is uncountable in this general sense and does not take the article a.
- 3. Fix verb pattern Original: contributing to boost tourism Suggested revision: helping to boost tourism Why it matters: Contribute cannot be followed by a to-infinitive in this construction.
- 4. Remove redundancy Original: preserved and protected Suggested revision: protected Why it matters: Preserved and protected convey nearly the same meaning in this sentence.
- 5. Use direct phrasing Original: new buildings in place of old ones Suggested revision: replacing old buildings with new ones Why it matters: The replacement expresses the proposed action more directly.
- 6. Improve collocation Original: pose a danger to public safety Suggested revision: pose a risk to public safety Why it matters: Pose a risk is the more conventional collocation in a safety context.
- 7. Use concise wording Original: unsuitable for habitation Suggested revision: unsafe to occupy Why it matters: The replacement conveys the practical safety concern more directly.
- 8. Clarify reference Original: the carbon footprint Suggested revision: their carbon footprint Why it matters: The possessive determiner clearly links the footprint to the new buildings.
- 9. Correct collocation Original: to ensure safety against earthquakes Suggested revision: to improve earthquake safety Why it matters: The replacement is a more natural way to describe increased structural safety.
- 10. Remove redundancy Original: a particular time period Suggested revision: a particular period Why it matters: Period already denotes a span of time, making time unnecessary.
- 11. Order supporting points Suggested revision: Place the earthquake example immediately after the safety evidence, then present energy efficiency as a separate advantage. Why it matters: This sequence would keep the example beside the claim it directly illustrates.
- 12. Strengthen progression Suggested revision: Group the cultural-link sentences first, then move from civic identity to tourism as the final practical benefit. Why it matters: A clearer conceptual sequence would make the paragraph progress more smoothly.
Suggested Rewrites
- old buildings, that are important and have historic significance should old buildings that are important and historically significant should
- a significant cultural and historical value significant cultural and historical value
- contributing to boost tourism helping to boost tourism
- preserved and protected protected
- new buildings in place of old ones replacing old buildings with new ones
- pose a danger to public safety pose a risk to public safety
Why this response received Band 8.0
The essay addresses both views directly, sustains a clear opinion, and develops its arguments with relevant explanations and examples in a well-organised structure. Its main limitation is occasional imprecision or awkwardness in otherwise flexible language, particularly in a few collocations and sentence constructions. Refine those local expressions and add slightly more nuanced evaluation of which old buildings merit legal protection.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Response
Both views are fully addressed, and the writer's consistent opinion is supported with relevant reasons and examples.
Add a more precise principle for deciding which historically significant buildings deserve protection despite safety concerns.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas are logically sequenced in well-focused paragraphs, and cohesive devices guide the reader without obscuring progression.
Reduce minor repetition of old buildings and make the final opinion paragraph add more synthesis before the conclusion.
Lexical Resource
A broad, topic-appropriate vocabulary conveys ideas precisely overall, with only occasional awkward collocations and repetition.
Refine phrases such as contributing to boost tourism and vary repeated key nouns where clarity permits.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The essay uses varied complex structures with strong control, though a few punctuation and construction errors remain.
Review relative-clause punctuation and verb patterns, especially structures following contribute and embedded modifiers.
Use this task for your next draft
Feedback is more useful when you actively apply it in a draft, rather than only recognising improvements on the page.
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.
The question will be loaded automatically.