Some people believe that to reduce the time people spend commuting, parks and gardens close to city centres should be replaced by apartment buildings. Others disagree with this idea. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Sample Response
To begin with, the supporting group believed this because people would be close to their destinations and traffic be brought down to a low level. When houses replace parks and gardens in the city’s centre, people will be proximal to the most visited places like workplaces, shops, and religious centres. Consequently, less time will be required to get to these places since they are stone thrown away. Also, traffic will be reduced since the major means of transportation will be trekking. Therefore, fewer commuters will be on the road, so traffic will be less. Secondly, the opposing group are against this idea because havens and gardens contribute positively to the climate and are important for relaxation.
The scenery of tourist centres helps improve the weather condition of a place and promotes visitors’ relaxation. For example, trees and green plants found in gardens expire oxygen that is important to human living. Similarly, the cool air they provide has a calming effect on the body, thereby reducing stress.
In conclusion, changing playgrounds to housing areas have benefits and consequences. However, I think the best location for parks and gardens is the city centre so that it can be accessible to people and improve the weather because most air pollution occurs in the city centre. Therefore, replacing them with houses is like sacrificing the environment for time management.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use present tense Original: believed Suggested revision: believes Why it matters: Use the present tense to describe the viewpoint stated in the task.
- 2. Add conditional auxiliary Original: traffic be brought down Suggested revision: traffic would be brought down Why it matters: The second result needs an auxiliary verb parallel to “would be close.”
- 3. Use standard collocation Original: city’s Suggested revision: city Why it matters: “City centre” is the standard noun phrase in this context.
- 4. Choose natural wording Original: proximal Suggested revision: close Why it matters: “Close to” is more natural for describing convenient locations.
- 5. Clarify frequency Original: most Suggested revision: frequently Why it matters: “Frequently visited” expresses how often people go to these places more precisely.
- 6. Correct the idiom Original: stone thrown away Suggested revision: a stone's throw away Why it matters: The fixed expression for a very short distance is “a stone's throw away.”
- 7. Use precise transport term Original: major means of transportation will be trekking Suggested revision: main mode of transport will be walking Why it matters: “Walking” is the appropriate everyday mode of transport; “trekking” implies a long recreational journey.
- 8. Improve traffic collocation Original: traffic will be less Suggested revision: traffic congestion will be lower Why it matters: Traffic congestion is naturally described as being lower rather than traffic being less.
- 9. Fix subject agreement Original: are Suggested revision: is Why it matters: The singular collective noun “group” requires “is” here.
- 10. Use the task term Original: havens Suggested revision: parks Why it matters: “Havens” does not refer to the green spaces discussed in the task.
- 11. Clarify environmental effect Original: contribute positively to the climate Suggested revision: benefit the local environment Why it matters: This wording expresses the intended environmental benefit more naturally and precisely.
- 12. Avoid category overlap Original: green Suggested revision: other Why it matters: Trees are plants, so “other plants” removes the redundant category overlap.
Suggested Rewrites
- believed believes
- traffic be brought down traffic would be brought down
- city’s city
- proximal close
- most frequently
- stone thrown away a stone's throw away
Why this response received Band 5.5
The response addresses both views and ends with a clear opinion, while its central reasons about commuting and environmental benefits remain relevant and generally understandable. Its main limitation is uneven development, compounded by being below the required length and by frequent inaccurate word choices; the highest priority is to extend each viewpoint with a precise, fully explained example before refining the language.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
Both views and a clear opinion are present, but the discussion is brief and some supporting claims remain general or imprecise.
Develop each viewpoint with a specific example and explain clearly how it supports the argument while meeting the minimum length.
Coherence and Cohesion
The main ideas are broadly sequenced, but the opposing view begins at the end of the first paragraph and paragraph focus is uneven.
Use a separate, clearly focused body paragraph for each view and make the transition between them explicit.
Lexical Resource
The response shows some range, but frequent inaccurate choices such as references to trekking, havens, and expiring oxygen reduce precision.
Choose natural topic-specific collocations and check that each noun and verb expresses the intended meaning exactly.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of sentence forms communicates the main ideas, although agreement, article, pronoun, and clause errors recur throughout.
Edit systematically for subject-verb agreement and plural reference, especially when the subject is parks, gardens, houses, or people.
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 to reduce the time people spend commuting, parks and gardens close to city centres should be replaced by apartment buildings. Others disagree with this idea. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.