The rapid urbanisation of large cities has created an urgent need for adequate housing, and some argue that constructing high-rise apartment blocks is the most effective solution. While I acknowledge that tall buildings can significantly increase housing capacity, I disagree that this is the best approach in all circumstances. Other strategies, such as suburban expansion and urban regeneration, are equally important in addressing the housing crisis.
On the one hand, building tall apartment blocks offers a practical and efficient way to accommodate growing populations in densely populated cities. High-rise developments make optimal use of limited land, allowing thousands of residents to live within a small geographical area. This is particularly beneficial in cities like Hong Kong and Singapore, where land scarcity is a critical issue. Furthermore, vertical living can reduce urban sprawl, thereby preserving green belts and agricultural land on the outskirts of cities. Tall buildings also support the development of public transport infrastructure, as a high population density justifies investment in underground trains and bus networks.
However, relying solely on high-rise construction presents significant drawbacks. Firstly, building upwards often leads to overcrowding and places immense strain on existing infrastructure, such as water supply, sewage systems, and road networks. Many residents in tall apartment blocks may feel isolated or experience poor mental health due to limited access to green spaces and natural light. Moreover, high-rise living can erode community cohesion, as residents often have little interaction with their neighbours. For example, in many Chinese megacities, although tower blocks have provided housing for millions, social isolation and a lack of community spirit have become growing concerns among urban planners.
In my view, a more balanced approach is necessary. In addition to building upwards, authorities should consider expanding suburban areas with well-designed housing estates that include parks and communal facilities. Another effective strategy is urban regeneration, whereby derelict industrial or commercial buildings are converted into residential units. This not only provides homes but also revitalises neglected neighbourhoods. Cities like London and Melbourne have successfully implemented such mixed-use redevelopment projects, which have increased housing supply while maintaining community character.
In conclusion, while tall apartment blocks are a valuable tool in tackling housing shortages, they are not the definitive solution. A comprehensive strategy that combines vertical construction with suburban expansion and urban renewal would be far more sustainable and beneficial in the long term.
Why this answer scores Band 7.0:
| Criteria | How the sample meets Band 7.0 requirements |
|---|---|
| Task Response | Clearly addresses the prompt with a balanced position (disagrees with "best way" but acknowledges benefits). Fully developed arguments with relevant examples from Hong Kong, Singapore, Chinese megacities, London, and Melbourne. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | Strong paragraph structure: introduction → benefits of tall buildings → drawbacks → alternative solutions → conclusion. Uses a range of cohesive devices: On the one hand, Furthermore, However, Moreover, In my view, In conclusion. Logical flow throughout. |
| Lexical Resource | Good range of vocabulary: rapid urbanisation, adequate housing, high-rise developments, urban sprawl, preserving green belts, strain on infrastructure, erode community cohesion, derelict, revitalises, mixed-use redevelopment. Uses collocations naturally (population density, public transport infrastructure, mental health). |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | Varied sentence structures including complex sentences with relative clauses (where land scarcity is a critical issue), conditional structures, and passive voice (are converted). Good control of tenses. Minor errors only. |
Why this is Band 7.0 (not 6.5 or 7.5):
| Aspect | Band 6.5 | Band 7.0 | Band 7.5+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Position | Clear but simplistic | Clear with nuance | Sophisticated and fully developed |
| Ideas | General statements | Specific examples | Deep analysis with cause-effect |
| Vocabulary | Some good words | Good range with precision | More sophisticated collocations and idioms |
| Grammar | Mix of simple/complex | Good control, some variety | Wide range, flawless control |
| Cohesion | Basic connectors | Range of cohesive devices | Seamless transitions |
| Examples | Vague | Specific and relevant | Integrated and analysed |
What holds this back from Band 7.5:
| Issue | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Vocabulary could be more sophisticated | Words like good, bad, important are avoided, but phrases like valuable tool and definitive solution could be replaced with more academic alternatives (panacea, optimal strategy). |
| Examples need more analysis | The examples (Hong Kong, London) are mentioned but not explained in depth. A Band 7.5+ would elaborate on why these examples support the argument. |
| Some repetition | Housing and tall buildings are repeated frequently. Synonyms like accommodation, residential units, dwellings, high-rises could add variety. |
| Conclusion could be stronger | A Band 7.5+ conclusion would not just summarise but also offer a final compelling thought or recommendation. |
Key tips for achieving Band 7.0 in Task 2:
Address all parts of the prompt – In this case, you must state your position clearly (to what extent do you agree?).
Structure with 4-5 paragraphs – Introduction, 2-3 body paragraphs (each with a clear topic sentence), and a conclusion.
Use specific examples – Avoid vague statements; use real cities, policies, or general knowledge to support arguments.
Show a range of vocabulary – Use topic-specific terms (urban planning, infrastructure, regeneration, density) and avoid repetition.
Use complex sentences – Combine ideas with relative clauses, conditional sentences, and cause-effect structures.
Write at least 250 words – Aim for 270-290 words for Band 7+.
Quick checklist for Band 7.0 Task 2:
Clear position in introduction
Balanced discussion (if discussing both sides)
Each paragraph has one main idea
Topic sentences are clear
Examples are relevant and developed
Range of linking words
Range of vocabulary (avoid repetition)
Mix of simple and complex sentences
Few grammatical errors
Conclusion summarises position
At least 250 words
Band Score 5.5Providing enough houses in a large city is a complex issue, however some claim that the best way to acomplish this is by building tall apartment blocks. This might sound intituative and straight forward but is this the only way or just a dogmatic way of thinking? Personally I think this proposed solution to propper housing is insufficient and lacks flexibility and is tried before in history and failed. In my opinion simply building tall apartment blocks is a simplistic approach to the issue of housing in large cities and thus I do not agree with the statement. A more hollistic approach to housing is more appropriated and succesfull because only building tall apparment blocks might be efficient but does not cover the broad scale of needs of the citizens of a large city. A family needs a completly different kind of housing than a single adult and with the approach of tall apartments the housing will be an one size fits all solution to a complex problem. In the Sovjet Union this was tried and it was unsuccesfull since the housing was not suited for larger families and the tall apartment blocks lacked the propper infrastructure to house the immens amount of people living in it. The region simply did not offer enough services and goods for the huge number of residents on suchs a small place. Overall the conclusion is that dogmatic building of tall aparment blocks might the fastest route to housing but not a desired way. The lack of flexibility an apartment offers compared to a ordinairy house is significant. The outcome would be one where noone would be truely happy.
Band Score 6.5As large population continues to grow in big cities, providing adequate housing is a major challenge. Some people believe that constructing gigantic apartments can provide better accomodation to maximum number of people along with essential anemities. I agree with this view because high rise housing makes efficient use of limited land, although it should be combined with other forms of housing and proper urban planning. The main advantage of tall apartment blocks is that they allow cities to accommodate more residents without expanding endlessly into surrounding areas. Land in major cities is often scarce and extremely expensive, so constructing vertically is a prcatical way to use it efficiently. for example, a single high rise building can provide hundreds of homes on a relatively small piece of land. this approach can also help preserve the agricultural land and green spaces on outskirts of cities. Furthermore, high-density housing can be located close to workplaces, schools and piblic transpost, reducing commuting distances and traffic congestion. However, relying exclusively on high-rise apartments may create certain problems. very densely populated residential areas can place considerable pressure on the public services such as water supply, electricity, roads, schools and hospitals. In addition, some people, may find apartment living less comfortable because they have limited private outdoor space and less privacy. There, government should not simply construct more towers, they should ensure that these buildings are supported with adequate infrastructure, recreational areas and essential services. In conclusion, I strongly believe that tall apartment blocks are one of the best ways to address the shortage of housing in large cities, particularly where land is limited. Nevertheless, they should be developed as a part of broader urban planning strategy that includes good availability of essential resources.
Band Score 6It is often agured that building tall residential towers in urban cities is the best way to solve increasing housing demands. I partly agree with this statement. Although, this innitiative will save a lot of space in the cities, and make housing affordable for general populace, some families will still choose to live in houses. Firstly, apartments are much more affordable as compared to traditional houses. Residants can enjoy a lot of amenities inside their building complex such as gym, common hall, pool etc. Most apartment towers are generally close to city downtowns, so it can be great accomodation option for young people with a limited budget. Occupants residing on top floors can enjoy city view. The only drawback is people often complain about the constant noise coming from ceilings and some people use elevators with their pets, which bothers people with allergies. However, even though owning a house is more expensive then an apartment, some people still prefer buying a house. It comes with drive-way, garage and backyard. Living in a house is much more better. For example, families can gather in the backyard and do a lot of activities such as barbeque, play games and enjoy a bonfire. Kids can play and drive their bikes on the drive-way. Everyone can move freely upstaires without worrying about the noises. To conclude, building apartment blocks will definitly ensure to minimise space occupancy in the cities and making housing affordable but everyone enjoys a different lifestyle and living in an apartment or house is a very personal choice.
Band Score 5.5There is no denying the fact that the more effecient way to create homes in larger cities comes by implementing apartement blocks that can alleviate population density inside cities. I consider this approach as the most relevant when it comes to providing enough shelter in metropollitain cities. To begin with, larger cities posses complex infrastrcutre and complex industries that needs human ressources to stay functionnable. Hence, making them vulnerable to receiving an important amount of workers. In addition, building tall apartment blocks is the most suffectient way to shelter as many workers per one place. for example, constructing one house can only provide shelter for only one family. on the other hand, one apartment block can shelter up to almost 20 families. Another point to consider, building this type of infrastructure has been the most effecieint method for city mayors to control the overally crowded areas as it gave more space for companies to build large blocks closer enough to the places of work without creating nonsens home propagation. In conclusion, despite people have different outcomes when it comes to this subject, i see that the most building blocks with the exploitation of the horizontally space has been the most effeicient way to create suffecient spaces in large cities where lack of space is considered as major problem to be solved.
Band Score 5.5The best way to build enough home in big cities is to provide tall apartment blocks. I completely agree with this statement and I will explain the reasons and include examples. Making enough homes for people in a large cities is build tall apartment blocks because in a large city there is a lot of opportunities for people and they gather for their bright future from different areas and population increasing day by day by the area of cities is stable its not increasing. So to balance this huge population accommodation build tall apartment is a very good idea . For instance if we have a small area we can not make more houses but we can make the building taller and it can hold more people. Another reason it built tall buildings give us more space in building we can enjoy the weather of upper level wind and nature , we can enjoy the view of the city. The populations are increasing day by day but the land we use for grow crops and other thinks is not increasing so building the tall buildings give us more land to use them for our well being . And making more home make the city more disruption and gathering so making tall apartments is the solution and we can see it in out cities. To conclude building more tall home is the best solution for adjust people and its has some benefits we have more land to use grow crops and use them for well being.