In the recent years, the proportion of the world’s population living in cities has increased substantially. People have moved in ever growing numbers from rural to urban areas. As migration from rural areas to cities continues, it is inevitable that the infrastructure on these cities will collapse. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
Today, people’s lifestyles have fundamentally been changed by urbanisation. It is believed that these alterations have had some positive influences; however, I personally think that their drawbacks will become far influential.
On the one hand, migration of rural residents into cities has had two important advantages on infrastructures. One is that constructions have been more developed. To build more high-rise buildings, construction developers have invested more in cities than the rural areas, leading citizens to access to stronger residential premises in urban areas. As a prime example, in Los Angeles, immigration of villagers has caused many investors to spend their money and develop more Skyscrapers, and LA citizens have access to more equipped apartments. Furthermore, transportation has been improved dramatically. Governments have had to provide more bus or train as more people have moved from suburbs to cities; therefore, the quality of infrastructures in transportation has gradually been raised. In particular, in Vancouver, mass migration of villagers has led the administration to consider more funds for the upgrading of transport systems in the downtown area.
On the other hand, I personally believe that it could be like a tip of an iceberg if we only consider the positive influences, and the negative consequences should be figured out. One reason behind it is that more agricultural lands will be degraded. Clearly, the more buildings are built, the more farmlands vegetations and woods will be ruined, and soil will be eroded. For instance, in Tehran, the Capital city of Iran, construction of more residential structures has tremendously changed the natural habitat. Many of agricultural lands have been eroded, and if this method continues, more farmlands will be destroyed by these constructions. In addition, freshwater resources will be contaminated. In this case, had not more rural households moved to New York, less freshwater would have been ruined. Unfortunately, mass immigration of people to cities will cause more freshwater plants and animals to be death in the future.
In conclusion, although urbanisation might have had some positive influences on some important infrastructures of cities, its drawbacks should not be forgotten. From my point of view, if this pattern continues, more freshwater resources and farmlands will be demolished. If I were a governor, I would consider more restrictions on these changes.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use effect noun Original: these alterations have had some positive influences Suggested revision: these changes have had some positive effects Why it matters: 'Effects' is the natural term for consequences of urbanisation in this context.
- 2. Complete comparative form Original: far influential Suggested revision: far more influential Why it matters: The intensifier 'far' requires the comparative phrase 'more influential'.
- 3. Correct benefit phrase Original: advantages on infrastructures Suggested revision: advantages for infrastructure Why it matters: The noun takes 'for', and 'infrastructure' is normally uncountable.
- 4. Clarify building growth Original: constructions have been more developed Suggested revision: construction has increased Why it matters: The revision uses the uncountable activity noun and states the claimed increase naturally.
- 5. Add comparison preposition Original: the Suggested revision: in Why it matters: The comparison is between investment in two locations, so 'in' is required.
- 6. Correct access structure Original: leading citizens to access to stronger residential premises Suggested revision: giving citizens access to sturdier homes Why it matters: The noun pattern is 'give someone access to', and 'homes' is more natural than 'residential premises'.
- 7. Name internal migration Original: immigration of villagers Suggested revision: migration from rural areas Why it matters: 'Immigration' usually refers to entering another country, while the essay describes domestic movement.
- 8. Use lowercase common noun Original: Skyscrapers Suggested revision: skyscrapers Why it matters: The common noun does not require a capital letter.
- 9. Use plural transport nouns Original: provide more bus or train Suggested revision: provide more buses and trains Why it matters: Countable transport vehicles require plural nouns, and both types are being added.
- 10. Use improvement verb Original: has gradually been raised Suggested revision: has gradually improved Why it matters: Quality improves; it is not normally 'raised' in this passive construction.
- 11. Correct funding collocation Original: consider more funds for the upgrading Suggested revision: allocate more funds to upgrading Why it matters: Administrations allocate funds 'to' an activity.
- 12. Use uncountable land noun Original: lands Suggested revision: land Why it matters: 'Land' is uncountable when referring generally to farmland.
Suggested Rewrites
- these alterations have had some positive influences these changes have had some positive effects
- far influential far more influential
- advantages on infrastructures advantages for infrastructure
- constructions have been more developed construction has increased
- the in
- leading citizens to access to stronger residential premises giving citizens access to sturdier homes
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response is clearly organised and develops detailed examples concerning construction, transport, farmland, and water resources. Its main limitation is task focus: the question asks whether city infrastructure will inevitably collapse, yet most of the negative case concerns environmental damage and the position on infrastructure collapse remains unclear. The highest-priority improvement is to answer that exact claim directly and analyse whether housing, transport, water, and other urban systems can withstand continued migration.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The essay discusses urbanisation in detail, but it only partially addresses the specific prediction of infrastructure collapse and substitutes environmental damage for much of the required analysis.
State a precise degree of agreement and evaluate whether specific urban systems will fail, adapt, or improve under migration pressure.
Coherence and Cohesion
The four-paragraph structure and overall contrast are easy to follow, although some internal links and references are mechanical or logically imprecise.
Build each body paragraph around one infrastructure claim and link every example explicitly back to the likelihood of collapse.
Lexical Resource
There is adequate topic-specific range, but frequent inaccurate collocations and word forms reduce clarity and naturalness.
Use precise phrases such as 'infrastructure', 'residential construction', 'better-equipped apartments', 'agricultural land', and 'aquatic life may die'.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The writer attempts varied complex structures, including comparison and conditional forms, but recurring errors with articles, plurals, passives, and clause patterns reduce accuracy.
Simplify and proofread complex sentences, especially the inverted conditional about New York and phrases such as 'lead citizens to gain access'.
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 recent years, the proportion of the world’s population living in cities has increased substantially. People have moved in ever growing numbers from rural to urban areas. As migration from rural areas to cities continues, it is inevitable that the infrastructure on these cities will collapse. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.