Some people believe that the government should spend more money putting in more works of art like paintings and statues in cities to make them better places to live in. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
Some feel governments should invest more in public art in cities to boost the quality of life. Personally, I am in disagreement with this idea because it has little actual importance for the average citizen.
On the one hand, public art beautifies a city. A city stripped of all art gives off the dreary appearance of being purely for utilitarian value and the daily rigour of work. In contrast, cities that have invested heavily in public art, such as New York City, offer their residents a beautiful and inspiring home. A child who sees sculptures and murals walking home will feel the city is a nicer place to live and workers passing by works of art will have some emotional relief from the demands of the day. This not only builds up the character of urban areas for local inhabitants and instills a sense of pride, but also attracts tourists and professional artists to the city, both of which contribute to a vibrant city.
Nonetheless, public art has little quantifiable positive value. Most city-dwellers are too engrossed in their hectic schedules to notice public art. This art, therefore, means nothing to most locals, while also diverting an outsized share of a city’s budget. There are other more vital areas requiring development such as high-end infrastructure, well-rounded healthcare systems, and modern recreational facilities. Moreover, the public space used to house these works of art cannot be used for practical purposes including critical public facilities like restrooms, bus stops or parks. Those who rely on these other facilities will have more trouble finding them and their quality of life may be somewhat impacted by a preference for art.
Despite the aesthetic value of public art, government bodies should focus more on urban issues that truly matter to their constituents. There must be a degree of balance but it should always tip more towards pragmatic concerns.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use formal phrasing Original: Some feel governments Suggested revision: Some people believe that governments Why it matters: The revision states the attributed opinion more explicitly in an academic register.
- 2. Make the stance direct Original: I am in disagreement with this idea Suggested revision: I disagree with this idea Why it matters: The direct verb is more concise and natural than the nominal phrase.
- 3. Choose precise wording Original: actual Suggested revision: practical Why it matters: Practical expresses the intended contrast with everyday priorities more precisely.
- 4. Improve the collocation Original: builds up the character Suggested revision: enriches the character Why it matters: Enriches collocates more naturally with the character of a city.
- 5. Clarify the value Original: quantifiable positive value Suggested revision: measurable practical value Why it matters: The revision makes the intended contrast with practical public spending clearer.
- 6. Remove double comparison Original: other more vital areas Suggested revision: more vital areas Why it matters: Other is redundant because no preceding set of vital areas has been identified.
- 7. Use natural collocation Original: end Suggested revision: quality Why it matters: High-quality is the appropriate description for effective public infrastructure.
- 8. Use precise adjective Original: well-rounded healthcare systems Suggested revision: comprehensive healthcare systems Why it matters: Comprehensive is the standard term for healthcare systems covering a broad range of needs.
- 9. Sentence rewrite Original: A city stripped of all art gives off the dreary appearance of being purely for utilitarian value and the daily rigour of work. Suggested revision: A city stripped of all art can appear dreary, purely utilitarian, and dominated by the daily rigour of work. Why it matters: The rewrite corrects the awkward complements after appearance while preserving the description.
- 10. Sentence rewrite Original: A child who sees sculptures and murals walking home will feel the city is a nicer place to live and workers passing by works of art will have some emotional relief from the demands of the day. Suggested revision: A child who sees sculptures and murals while walking home may feel that the city is a nicer place to live, while workers passing works of art may gain some emotional relief from the demands of the day. Why it matters: The rewrite removes the misplaced modifier and separates the two subjects clearly.
- 11. Sentence rewrite Original: This art, therefore, means nothing to most locals, while also diverting an outsized share of a city’s budget. Suggested revision: Therefore, this art means little to most locals, while spending on it diverts an outsized share of the city’s budget. Why it matters: The rewrite gives diverting a logical subject and avoids the claim that the artworks themselves control spending.
Suggested Rewrites
- Some feel governments Some people believe that governments
- I am in disagreement with this idea I disagree with this idea
- actual practical
- builds up the character enriches the character
- quantifiable positive value measurable practical value
- other more vital areas more vital areas
Why this response received Band 8.0
The essay offers a clear, nuanced position and develops both the aesthetic case for public art and the practical case against increased spending through a logically sequenced argument. Its main limitation is that some supporting claims, especially about public space and budget allocation, are asserted too broadly; the highest-priority improvement is to qualify these claims and explain the trade-offs with greater precision.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The response addresses the question directly, sustains a clear disagreement, and develops both the concession and the central argument in substantial detail.
Qualify the claim that art prevents space from serving practical purposes and explain when this trade-off would actually occur.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument progresses clearly from concession to rebuttal, with cohesive devices and paragraphing supporting an easy-to-follow line of reasoning.
Strengthen the link between the budget argument and the space argument so they read as connected reasons rather than separate objections.
Lexical Resource
The response uses a broad and precise academic vocabulary, with strong control of topic-specific and evaluative language.
Replace slightly strained combinations such as "high-end infrastructure" and "well-rounded healthcare systems" with more natural, exact alternatives.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex structures are handled flexibly and accurately, and the few minor punctuation or phrasing lapses do not impede meaning.
Use commas consistently in lists, particularly before the final item in a series, to polish already strong sentence control.
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
Some people believe that the government should spend more money putting in more works of art like paintings and statues in cities to make them better places to live in. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.