Free IELTS resources to help you maximize your score.
Don’t stop at 7. Go and get that 9!

Dear Ryan,
Thanks to your guidance, I was able to increase my writing score from 6.5 to 7.5, and then to 8.5! I really don't believe I could have done it without you.
-Imam Mohamed

Hi Ryan,
I am so happy to inform you that I scored 7.5 in writing!
-Sunish Manalody

Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your help, I’ve scored band 8 in writing.
-Vladan Martinovic

Hi Ryan,
I prepared just by looking at your videos and scored 7.5! Thank you!
-Rahul Paldiwal

Hi Ryan,
I would like to thank you for your very helpful lessons. I finally got 7 in all modules and can now start residency processing for New Zealand!
-Kiran Kiccha

Hi Ryan,
I obtained a writing score of 8.5. Your videos were instrumental in helping me achieving this score. Thanks, mate!
-Carlos Flores

Hi Ryan,
Thank you for my 8.0 writing score. You ebook played a pivotal role in my success!
-Awais Butt

Hi Ryan,
I read your blog every day and scored 7.5 in writing!
-Vikrant Mahajan

I went from band 6.0 to 7.5 following Ryan’s coaching!
-Viacheslav Porotikov

IELTS Writing Module Contest results! 37 of your essays assessed!

Posted on January 19, 2012 by

Thank you to the 37 people who participated in our contest!  Below is a walk-through of the question, marking process and results that were achieved via the contest. Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that I am not an IELTS examiner. The following results may not reflect the actual result you receive on the IELTS exam.

The question:

Some people feel that the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities should be controlled by governments. Others contest those who finance the construction of a building should be free to design it as they see fit. What is your position? Discuss both sides in your response.

The marking process:

To correct the essays, I used the public version of the IELTS Task 2 Writing band descriptors chart available from www.ielts.org.

If you look at this chart, you will see that the writing mark is broken down into 4 broad categories: Task Achievement, Coherence, Lexical Resources, Grammatical Range and Accuracy. To get to the final suggested band for each essay, I graded your writing according to each of these columns, then averaged the score.

The results:

Unfortunately, nobody scored a 7 this time around. The top essays in the contest were held back by simple wording and grammatical issues. I think if these areas were to be cleaned up these people would easily get a 7 or higher. For those of you on the bottom of this list, please do not feel discouraged. Use the essays above you to help you improve. In the list, essays highlighted in Blue scored between 6 and 7. Essays highlighted in Red scored at various bands below 6.

My comments:

-There were a few essays that scored rather high in the Task Achievement portion of the mark, yet rather low in Lexical Resources and Grammatical Range and Accuracy, which of course lowered their overall mark significantly.

-A few people responded to this essay question using an argument essay structure. As the question instructs you to ‘discuss’ the statement, a discussion essay structure would be most fitting, which would mean sharing your opinion at the end of your essay.

-A number of students presented some interesting alternative structures to their essays. Personally, I feel that arguments are most strongly presented when an example is shared and then discussed. Some students tried to reverse this by discussing an issue and then showing it in action with an example.

-Some students, as you’ll see, wrote excessively long sentences. There was one student in particular that only had four sentences in their entire essay (each sentence was a paragraph long). Of course, no matter how effective your argument, these kinds of mistakes are going to harm your overall mark on the exam.

So what is the difference between the first few blue essays and the rest of the essays? Structure is obviously stronger in the top essays than in the remaining ones. Further, the first few essays are written with a fair amount of clarity (despite the occasional grammatical mistake). Lexical resources are contextually accurate, if awkward from time-to-time.

What is keeping the first few blue essays from achieving a score of 7? Grammar is a big thing. As you’ll notice, most of these top essays still suffer grammatical issues. Awkward wordings is also an issue. Although we as readers can understand what these writers are saying, their choice of words is at times uncomfortable to read.

The essays:

Essay 1 (Student’s country: Sri Lanka)

In today’s world, construction industry has grown beyond wildest expectations. In most of the gigantic cities mammoth buildings have become a special feature which attracts thousands of people. However, whether the modern designs of buildings should be approved by government before construction begin or not is a controvertial one which is debated by many people. This will be criticized before a well reasoned conclusion is reached.

On the one hand, people who invest millions of dollars in a building expect to have a unique design which can provide needed outcome of the project. For instance, the Berj Dubai building design is one that has not been controlled by any government. This has allow the engineers to built the biggest and beautiful building of the world. This has allow them to earn millions dollars in revenue in a short period of time. These benefits won’t be possible, if the government implement any control in building design.

On the other hand, uncontrolled designers and engineers of buildings mostly consider the revenue rather than other crucial measures such as safety. To illustrate, a research conducted in Canada, buildings which are built without any government intervention are not capable of standing earthquake. In addition, most of them lack of most needed safety features such as emergency exit routes and fire control system. When looking at this example, it is clear that why some people believe that government intervention is necessary in building designs.

To conclude, in my opinion, government control is crucial to make sure the building is fit to stand without causing problem to users of the building. It is predicted that more government intervention will take place to lift the standards of buildings in the foreseeable future.

Essay 2 (Student’s country: Malaysia)

The architectural features of a building are often dictated by the owner’s preference. However, a recent argument that the design shall be controlled by the governments has sparked a heated debate. Both views will be discussed based on commercial interests and cultural assassination respectively before a stand can be drawn.

On the one hand, the paymaster is entitled to determine the final appearance of the building simply because it is an investment. For instance, a famous contemporary café in Taipei city has been controversially designed to resemble jail facilities. As a result of this unique and fresh idea, the jail themed café has attracted thousands of customers and tourists alike since its establishment. This point shows the aesthetic feature of a building has a financial implication on the owner’s business.

On the other hand, the government is responsible to monitor the design of building in order to preserve the nation’s cultural heritage. For instance, a recent poll suggested that 70% of the residents were unhappy with the development of Bangkok city as the booming skyscrapers gradually diminish the nation’s identity. If the design of building is controlled by the government, the traditional features would be incorporated as part of the regulations. This example shows the role of government in safeguarding the cultural image of its city.

From the discussion above, it is felt both show merit and significance for the interest of the nation’s economy and tradition. It is concluded that the final design of a building shall be decided by the owner provided it complies with the government specifications and regulations.

Essay 3 (Student’s country: China)

Nowadays with the fast-growing economy of some major cities in the world, more and more modern buildings are being erected to accommodate the burgeoning population that the economic growth brings. However, there is debate over whether local governments or construction companies should be responsible for the design of buildings. In my view, construction authorities should dictate how buildings are to be built.

On one side of the debate, there are people who argue that construction companies have more financial backing for their construction projects, and they know what consumers want and will design buildings accordingly. Private construction firms can get their money from various sources, ranging from local high street banks to credit unions, and typically can arrange a loan without much difficulty or delay. With the money in hand, they can hire leading architects to design buildings for them. In addition, they are more likely to tailor their design to consumers’ ever-changing taste in urban structure. For example, they might carry out surveys or questionnaires to ascertain what consumers’ thoughts and suggestions on a potential design.

On the other side of the debate, it is often argued that governments tend to safeguard the general public’s interests and design buildings accordingly. More often than not, they have records of areas affected by disasters in the history and will design buildings that can usually withstand just about every natural disaster such as earthquakes, floods and tornados. For example, they are more likely to design buildings that have the bottom floor only as an underground garage in place of an apartment on a floodplain.

In conclusion, I believe that construction companies should design buildings as they usually have strong financial backing and can design buildings that appeal to consumers’ taste. However, they still need to consider the local community’s safety issues should the need arise.

Essay 4 (Student’s country: Egypt)

In the modern world today, a huge number of buildings are being constructed for a variety of reasons. Typically, each of these buildings serves a particular purpose and, consequently, the design of them is dissimilar. As a result, this has created a considerable controversy whether governments should manage the designs of modern constructions or rather the constructors are ought to make this decision according to their preferences. Before a final conclusion is drawn, both of these views would be analysed carefully.

To begin with, those who believe that buildings’ design should not be controlled by the governments point out that variations in buildings is essential so as to improve the general overview of cities. Otherwise, most buildings would appear very similar which will probably result in public dissatisfaction. What is more is that it is generally accepted that this is one of their rights, especially in the age of freedom, nowadays.

On the other hand, supporters of authorities managment of buildings’ design maintain that planning of up-to-date and metropolitan cities is a matter of public concern. They argue that the regimes would create far more sophisticated plans for cities that, generally, the cities would be more organized and deciplined where each building function as a part in a comprehensive unit. Moreover, real state companies could possibly construct buildings based on their budget and ignore the general outlook, to some extent.

In conclusion, there are objectors and advocates regarding government control of the design of constructions , however, it seems to me that government would better handle this matter than individual owners. It is hoped that this would be supported by most people for the greater good.

Essay 5 (Student’s country: China)

Designing and constructing new buildings in big cities is the frequent topic of arguments nowadays. Some people believe that the governments or the relevant bureau should keep an eye on the design and construction of those new buildings. While others argue that companies or individuals who raise money to construct a new building should have the freedom on designing it to any form they want.

Introducing a new building in big cities should take different stakeholders’ opinions into account. Government and relevant bureau is the most powerful stakeholder in this issue. They need to ascertain that the design of the new buildings is in accord with the current safety regulations and laws. And they should monitor the quality of those buildings through the construction process. Furthermore, they should also focus on the urban planning issues. For instance, when designing a skyscraper in the CBD area, government should assure that the design should be applicable and harmony with the city’s skyline and other surrounding buildings.

On the other hand, the companies or individuals who finance the buildings are also powerful stakeholders. Some people argue that the government regulations curb the architects’ creativeness. They believe that government should loosen the regulations on new buildings in order to encourage the architects to demonstrate their new ideas and make the city more colorful. However, their arguments are biased and don’t take other people’s interests into consideration. For instance, if the design didn’t pass the quality and safety regulations, it would be a time bomb for future disaster and casualty.

In conclusion, government should maintain their control on the design and construction of new buildings, especially on the qualities and safety area. On the other hand, government also should encourage the creativeness of the architects by communicating with them more efficiently during the design process.

Essay 6 (Student’s country: Azerbaijan)
Note: This essay is 358 words. This is probably a length most people could not complete within 40 minutes.

As a result of significant growth of population worldwide, big cities are struggling to provide their citizens with more apartments and work places. This brings to enormous amounts of constructions in cities. Governments willing to supervise all constructions and control the appearance of newly constructed buildings, but it is believed by many that the governments` control is unnecessary. From the one hand some people support the idea that without governments` control general look of the big historical cities may change dramatically. From the other hand some argue that people who finance the constructions and design buildings should be free in the ways of expressing their ideas connected with the appearance of the building structures. Both points of view will be discussed before the conclusion is drawn.

Architects are very creative people with bountiful amounts of ideas in their heads. However people financing their work through the lack of knowledge can improperly use the creativity of designers. As a result new constructions may damage the appearance of the place where they have been built. For example, London which was always famous for marvelous historical buildings undergoes a gradual change as more new buildings are being built every year. This example makes it clear that if government would not control the design of newly constructed buildings London can loose its historical beauty. Thereby become less popular among tourists, leading to decrease in income which travelers bring to the country. Thus, the importance of governments` supervision is necessary in particular cases.

However, many people support the idea that people paying for construction should be free in their decisions of buildings` designs. For instance, New York which is famous for its unbelievable futuristic skyscrapers only benefits from freedom which is given for the architects and heir sponsors. The city has gained popularity because of an amazing job of designers, who have freedom to express their architectural ideas. When looking at the example it is clear why many people support the claim that, constructions held in big cities should not be controlled by governments.

After analyzing both points of view it is concluded that governments have to control the designs of newly constructed buildings to prevent undesirable changes in the appearances of their cities. It is predicted that governments will pay more attention to the constructions and prevent harmful affects of architectural freedom.

Essay 7 (Student’s country: Japan)

In today’s world, the issue of unique design buildings is ever increasing. Even in some rural areas landscape regulations can be commonly introduced. The argument that governments in big cities should restrict the design of new buildings is a subject that is both supported and refuted by many. Both sides of this argument will be analyzed before a reasoned conclusion is drawn.

Firstly, it is easy to see the benefits of introducing the city landscape ordinance for constructing new buildings. For example, according to the Census of Bureau in Australia, the number of tourists in Sydney has increased by 20 percent for last ten years after the color of the roof for new buildings are restricted by Sydney council. Therefore, by controlling the design of new buildings, city’s sceneries are remained cultural features, which eventually would attract more visitors and prospers their economic. Because of this it is easy to see why the argument that new buildings need to be control for its design by government has garnered supports.

However, on the other side of this argument it must be considered that people who spend on construction of the buildings should decide its design freely. For instance, it is commonly understood that the founders of the buildings require the design which meets their needs. Their favorable type of design, however, might be too unique to destroy the beauty of the scenery in their city, where the area has been protected by the government for its cultural values of buildings over the centuries. Thus, this makes it clear why the argument that governments need to control the design of newly constructed buildings could also be plausible.

In summary, both sides of this argument regarding the possibility of the restriction of design for new building construction in big urban areas have strong support. However after analyzing both camps it is clear that the idea of controlling the new construction by governments can be supported. As such, it is predicted that more governments in the world will control the design of the new buildings for their benefits in the future.

Essay 8 (Student’s country: India)
Note: This essay is 361 words. This is a length most people could not comfortably write in 40 minutes.

Design of a building controls many factors such as how the building will look like from outside, how much area it will cover and how building norms will be followed. As the world population is increasing day by day, new buildings’ requirement is also increasing in all most all big cities of the world, so the construction of new buildings. Since the design of a building decides many factors of the building, it is believed by some people that design of new buildings should be controlled by governments whereas other group refute this argument. Both the points of views will be discussed with the help of examples before a reasoned conclusion is found.

Firstly, it is believed by some people that if the architecture of new buildings will be decided by governments, the all norms of a building could be followed more easily. For example, In India many construction companies build new buildings without considering emergency exits to save the cost of construction and create more space in the building. Due to this many a times, people face problems in emergency situations. This example makes it clear why people think that design of the buildings should be controlled by governments.

On the other hand, other people think that designs decided by governments could not be that accurate and may not solve the actual purpose of the building. For example, many government buildings in India frequently need alteration in design due to lack of clear purpose of that office, which eventually increases the cost of the construction. By giving the free hand on design to the owners of the building, they could build the building in the desired way and more economically. This example makes it clear why people think that construction of a new building should be taken care by those who finance it.

After analysing the positive ramification of both the sides, it is believed that design of a new building should be controlled by the owners or finance providers. However, government should keep an eye on security norms to avoid the problems during emergency situations. It is hoped that, new buildings will be designed freely by finance providers by following all standard norms.

Essay 9 (Student’s country: Korea)
Note: This essay is 374 words long. This is a length that most likely could not be compiled in 40 minutes without significant errors.

The majority of big cities suffer from highly dense population and one of the serious problems caused by this is surprisingly reduced land to construct new buildings. This raises an argument regarding the main body to control new constructions between the government and an individual who invest the property. In my point of view, it seems more reasonable to grant design decision making by individuals.

To begin with, it could be admitted that the government controlled buildings could be more effective in time and cost wise. The reason for this is due to relatively straight forward design guidelines of new buildings which help to shorten construction processes as they usually deal with practical issues such as setback or maximum building height. Also, when buildings are controlled by the government, maintenance fee of these buildings as well as infrastructure that is especially operated underground such as subway or sewage system could be minimised as all these relevant documentations are consistently administrated by one body, the government.

Nevertheless, it would be more beneficial if a variety of new buildings are respected. By this I mean that architecture in modern society is not limited to a space that is merely utilised for residential or commercial purposes but extended to what contributes to form an overall urban fabric that reflects vision of the city, individual’s life style and natural characteristics of the city, which ultimately creates financial value through various ways including tourism and investments that would be hardly expected by typically designed buildings by the government. Moreover, if the nature of architecture, which is designed tailored to users or owners of buildings is neglected, big cities with new buildings would become a concrete jungle which can be found anywehre across the world. Therefore, there is no doubt that the right to construct a new building should be left with those who own the building.

To sum up, as all issues are controversial between those for and against, the issue of whether new buildings in major cities should be managed by the government is not an exception. However, as stated above, advantages of building control by the government do not outweigh those of individual’s management. Hence, there is no reason not to allow developers to design their own buildings.

Essay 10 (Student’s country: Japan)

Recently, a great deal of attention has been paid to a consistent landscape of a city. Therefore, there is a growing discussion over whether government should restrict the forms of new constructions. Some people state that some restrictions by governmental bodies might be inevitable. However, there are some individuals who disagree with this idea. In this essay, the issues of building restrictions will be examined carefully.

It is claimed that the design of new constructions should be at the discretion of the owners of the buildings. They have the right to decide the shapes of those constructions as they are their private properties. In my opinion, however, this right should be limited to some extent for public happiness. In China in 1990’s, for example, a range of developers exploited the land along the seaside arbitrarily. As a result, there was no consistency in seaside cities such as Shanghai.

On the other hand, however, the design of new constructions is regulated by governmental bodies in most developed countries nowadays. Buildings in one city should be designed in harmony with each other so that the city has a single tone of view. Nara city for example, a middle sized city located in the Western part of Japan, which is famous for traditional temples and shrines as an ancient capital city, established a policy then designs of new buildings were regulated by the ordinance. The mood of the city was conserved then the number of tourists has increased dramatically since then.

In conclusion, I would like to emphasise that new buildings in a city should be harmonious with existing buildings, despite the fact that the owner of a property has the right to decide the form of the buildings. A city with one consistent look would be highly beneficial to local citizens.

Essay 11 (Student’s country: China)

In present society, increasingly number of amazing architectures are being built or have already stand in modern cities. When we are applauding the outstanding design of these constructions, some of us maybe noticed that in some cities, most of the buildings share the same style, while in other cities, they show different styles from building to building. In my point of view, freestyle design of architectures are more acceptable for this modern society.

Normally, the traditional historical cities often show us the same kind of building appearance. That is decided by the cities’ government. The hosts of the buildings always don not have rights to design the architectures. The authorities control the permission in order to ensure all of the constructions share a same traditional style which can represent the historical of the city. Therefore, what we got from these cities are boring landscape which is lack of attractiveness for most of the young people like tourists. That is one of the reasons why some old historical tourist attraction cities are bearing the low profits from tourism year by year.

Moving eyes to other dynamic cities which always show different face to every tourist or their own resident every day. Why they can have so much modern outstanding and dynamic constructions? It all benefits from the governments authorizing the organizations to design the architectures in their cities. The design concept and inspirations are variously from company to company, even person to person. Every architect brings different appearance of the building to you, even from one architect, the same person, the products will be totally different in every different stage of his or her career. In this kind of cities, people feel everything is changeable and attractive. The top-north architects are willing to contribute their great talents to these cities which are no any restriction from government. Obviously, it is a benign circulation which everyone what to see.

Overall, it is easy to get the conclusion that free of the constructions’ design has more advantages than being controlled by the governments.

Essay 12 (Student’s country: India)
Note: This is the longest essay I received: 439 words.

Today, many emerging cities have an influx of various types of buildings. These are referred as residential, industrial and civic buildings. There is a view point that supports and believes that the design of newly developed buildings in many metro cities should be regulated by regulatory bodies. This type of regulation ensures the inhabitants that they are safer to live in. However, there is an opposing view point that the individuals who invest the capital in the construction of these modern day buildings should have the accessibility to design these as they find fit. This essay will look at both sides of the argument as follows.

On one hand, the planning authorities of a city should examine the arrangements of different parts of a building quite cautiously from the stand point of safety. When it comes to safety, they need to understand all the safety measures during the outline of a building. Perhaps one of the most important safety features, these days, is to analyze whether these buildings are earth quick prone or not? It is equally possible to say that the plan of these buildings should be examined by the developing authorities in such a way that might provide environmentally friendly living conditions to the occupants. For example, if local councils deregulate the plan of these buildings, there would be probably more potential dangers to environment. Thus, it is understandable that controlling the plan of these complexes is extremely important to support the population as a whole.

On the other hand, there are some good reasons for believing that the developers who finance the money in the construction of such buildings should be allowed to design them as they believe technologically fit. First of this is that the investors renovate these complexes in a way that might provide all luxurious benefits to the occupants at an affordable cost. Second of this is that the developers, these days, are including many new patterns such as swimming pool, Gym and small theatre in design. This can be considered as a new innovation in the modern archeture. There is a good illustration of this is the house of Sachin Tendulkar, a famous Indian cricketer. His house consists of four floors including a gym, swimming pool and a theatre. Thus, It is clear that the investors should a free access to design the buildings without any intervention of local governments.

After looking at the above, the design of the buildings should not be checked by governments because it has more pros than cones. My belief is that the developers should be free to develop these lately constructed buildings in whatever way they prefer to plan them. Thus, it is expected that the developers would accomplish their work in a safer way.

Essay 13 (Student’s country: Uzbekistan)

Town building became a growing industry in the large cities in the past decades. Whether government regulation in the design of the buildings is obligatory is often a highly debated topic. However, it is felt that the architecture of the whole city would profit from the freedom of creation of the constructions by people who finance them. This will be proven by looking at both sides of the argument.

On the one, authorities are concerned with the city’s view. For instance, in Tashkent the design of the newly built large-scale constructions are controlled by the ruling top. As a result, all of them are similar to each other. Because of this, the most of the modern buildings look stereotyped and unoriginal. This example leads to the conclusion that the government should not partake in decision-making process of the view of the contemporary buildings.

On the other hand, the absence of the government’s influence in constructing new buildings enables people to implement original ideas in the design. For example, were the present-day architecture not constrained by the authorities, the city would have more creative image. Hence, it would have a positive effect on the urban landscape. Thus, the benefits of the free hand in construction for the city can be seen.

After looking at the above, it is clear that the government’s control deprives people of creation and implementation the distinctive ideas of how buildings should look. Thus, it is recommended that government would no longer determine the view of the architecture in the cities.

Essay 14 (Student’s country: India)

Over the few decades, with the rise of population, construction of buildings became an industry and now there is mushrooming number of players in this segment with varied standards. On the other hand, bureaucrats in their pursuit to provide good governance, giving lot of emphasis on the town plans and are often trying to control the designs of newly constructed buildings. Let us analyse both sides of this argument before we come to a reasoned conclusion.

To begin with, if bureaucrats try to control the designs of these buildings by enforcing stringent laws then in most of these cases the individuals who finance these projects may have to incur losses. And over a period of time, these interventions may discourage the new entrepreneur who would like to pursue this industry. For instance, in a highly commercial area such as central business district, if government ask not to go for sky scrappers then it may be huge financial loss for that individual.

However, in majority of the cases, government will only intervene to promote better governance and to seek long term benefits. For example, government may be having some future plans for some special projects which may have to do with the design of builds in those suburbs. Projects like construction of large international airports may have to enforce the laws such as in those surrounding suburbs there can not be a high rise building.

Besides, government will be having better holistic picture of the region in their control. And in line to that they may enforce the restrictions on these designs. For instance, some suburbs may be bit more prone to floods and earthquakes or natural calamities. And in these suburbs there may be a restriction on the type of material to be used or the design that should be adopted for those buildings.

To recapitulate, having analysed from multiple facets, it is evident that the long term benefits are more with the government being controlling the builders. Hence, I feel government should have control in place on the building designs being implemented.

Essay 15 (Student’s country: unknown)

In this modern world, the infrastructure of big cities is entirely changed due to the newly constructed buildings. Architects are introducing new designs for construction day by day. Some people gravitate toward the view that financial owner of a building should be independent to choose design. I personally refute the statement as governments should control the structure of building. In this essay, both these views will be highlighted in detail.

It is an undeniable fact that the person who finance the building invest large amount of money. Starting from mortgage to the end of construction, they spent millions of dollars. The restriction to select design may cause financial cost to rise extremely high with unsatisfactory model of a construction site beyond spending too much money. In addition to this, it is their moral right to select design of their own choice. Thus, some people believe that investors of finance should be solely responsible for graphic selection.

However, Governments play an important and pivotal role to attract tourist through the development of cities. Sydney is one of the popular and exotic examples of tourist city just because governments intervene to approve structure before construction. Moreover, this interference is essential to develop specific and uniform infrastructure of large cities. In particular, all houses in Australia have set single storey houses due to set single storey structure. Consequently, the cities prevails an enormous and identical view from city tower.

All in all, despite the fact that people are financial owner and have their moral right to preserve own choice, I believe that government’s interference for the design of building is necessary in order to maintain urban infrastructure.

Essay 16 (Student’s country: India)

Real estate is one of the growing sector everywhere in the world. Several factors have led to this tremendous development in the construction world. Among all the factors, design of the building plays a pivotal role. A section of the society, believes that design of the newly planned buildings in big metros, should happen under the supervision of government. Others hold different opinion altogether. Both the set of opinions will be analyzed in detail in this essay, accordingly.

On one hand, some of the people hold a thought that bringing building design under government control, will solve multiple problems involved in construction world. One of these for example, is related to buildings meeting the construction norms outlined for the city by the planning department. At the initial stage itself it will be evident that building is suitable for the place in the city or different location needs to be identified. Thus, it is clear that government’s involvement will add value to the building design.

Compared to above point, other people are of the opinion that financing institutions should be allowed to work independently and implement their plan without government’s intervention. Reason behind this mindset is that, it will allow companies to think differently and come up with a design that is more eco-friendly and under the budget. Therefore, it is believed that financing companies must be left at their own will to design projects freely.

Based on the above point of views discussed, it is evident that government’s interference is necessary to force companies follow the guidelines and not play with the approved city plan, just to earn more profit. Hence, it is necessary that government must implement strong rules and regular checks before passing the building design to avoid disaster happening in near future.

 

Essay 17 (Student’s country: Vietnam)

In the present age, with the unstoppable development of industrialization and urbanization, more and more constructions are being built for different purposes. However, there are a number of people who believe that it is the governments that are in control of newly constructed buildings in big urban areas; meanwhile, some others go further and argue that this issue is none of the government’s business. In my essay, ideas surrounding this heated argument will be discussed before a conclusion is reached.

To begin with, it is fairly easy to understand why a lot of people think that the design of newly constructed buildings should be one of the managerial jobs of the government. This may stem from the fact that these days, in big cities, there are numerous buildings in bad and ugly outlook due to uncontrollable and rushing projects. Also, there are quite a lot of cases in which the dishonest architectures and project holders who corrupt the invested money and thus buy cheap and low-quality materials. The consequence is that the buildings made of those materials are in bad condition and fall. As a result, if the governments took action of controlling the design of urban construction, it would be much safer for both people and the buildings themselves.

Nevertheless, the control of the governments does not always come to effect. This is because any designs of building require necessary and thorough knowledge and skills which are sometimes far beyond the ken of the governments. In addition, if the governments were in charge of the designs of building in the big cities, this may cause unemployment.

After looking at both sides of this argument, we figure out that sometimes responsibility of the governments is very controversial. My own view is that as of the designs of building in any place, no matter in big cities or in small countries, the governments should not take the responsibility to control the construction designs.

Essay 18 (Student’s country: Iran)
Note: this essay is 361 words long.

Among most societies design of newly built structures is often a debated topic. Some people believe that it should be created freely while others think that it should be controlled by the government. Both sides of this argument will be discussed prior to a conclusion is reached.

On the one hand, the people who share the idea of governmental control over constructions design often defend it by arguing that the cultural unity of the city would be protected through this practice. For a good example one needs to look no further than Kuala Lampur. It is a city of numerous architectural styles which is almost impossible for everyone to decide which is related to ancient Malayan. Elderly people in Malaysia always complain tourists will never be able to be familiar with their cultural heritage that is rich in artistic style of design as their buildings design represent from ancient Indian and Chinese style to modern architecture of twenty first century one. This example clearly shows that why some people gravitate towards the idea that design of a city should be defined by government as a whole.

On the other hand, others believed that they should be free to choose their favorite style of structure as far as they finance it. Istanbul acts as a good example here. The state authorities in Turkey have made several strict restrictions regarding architectural design. According to these rules, no one can construct a building in this city with exterior design other than traditional style of this country. People who are active in business believe that their traditional style of architecture does not satisfy the needs of a business spirit. In turn, they believed that government should provide high level of freedom in which investors can present their business climate in modern appearance of their structures. It is thus understandable that why some people believe that they should have the right to choose the appearance of their buildings.

After looking at both sides of above debate, it is felt that all people should have the chance to demonstrate their ideas through construction of different styles. It is hoped that this can lead to have more interesting and attractive cities around the globe.

Essay 19 (Student’s country: Korea)

In modern society, there are a lot of buildings since the dawn of time. Their typical designs which owned by newly built facilities are increasingly becoming disputable issue nowadays. Both sides will be analyzed in the following paragraphs and I will elaborate my own stance on this topic.
On the one hand, allowing government to regulate the designs that are applied to the new creation would have positive impacts on the safety of human beings. For example, although a building’s design is innovative and revolutionary, most states have quite conservative opinions on such practices that might be detrimental to the safety of structures and such policies would be plausible for their citizens to support administrator’s safety guidelines. Thus, it is evident that supervising the design of new establishments can play a pivotal role in recognizing the potential risk.

On the other hand, those who have opportunities to select the design of new creation by themselves can argue that their activities would largely contribute to the advancement of their local economy. “Buzz Dubai” can be illustrated as an example for this. Its revolutionary design rendered by its owner can garner plenty of money that is generated by travelers. It could not success unless its design was not regulated by its public officer for the reason of safety. Thus, it is obvious that providing a right for owner to choose the design of new structure can benefit nation to boost its local economy in some ways.

After analyzing how government control can guarantee the safety of human beings in a new buildings and typical design can lure a lot of travelers, it has been proven that the selection of new creations done by owner freely can benefit more than that of the nation’s supervision..

Essay 20 (Student’s country: unknown)

Since the beginning of recorded time, government sector has brought numerous benefit to the lifestyles and societies as a whole. But with it, a number of social conflict has been set in motion. Many people believe that government should censor the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities. However, others protest that the financiers of these building constructions should design them unaided as supposed. In this essay, both debate will be analyzed in order before a reasonable conclusion is drawn.

On the one hand, many feel that government should regulate the design of new building constructions in big cities. For example, in African countries, especially Nigeria, it is up to government to decide the pattern of new building constructions in big cities. As a result of this ideology, it will enable the society to maintain a particular uniform pattern of housing structures in order to avoid chaotic planning. Thus, it is understandable why many support this point of view.

On the other hand, many people support the notion that those financing building construction should be allowed to design them as suitable. To illustrate, some wealthy chunks see it as an opportunity to invest irrespective of housing regulatory design by the government. This example makes it clear that, the design of newly structured houses will ultimately improves peoples lifestyle if not interrupted by state supervision. Thus, it is clear why this point of view is geared to support by many.

After analyzing the above points regarding this debate, it is thus proven that the society should adopt from both camps as a strategy to deal with building constructions. It is expected that one day, many will come to acknowledge this fact.

 

Essay 21 (Student’s country: Pakistan)

The end of World War II saw the beginning of rebuilding of cities all around the world, with structures of all shapes and sizes, constantly changing the metropolitan cities skylines. An often debated topic is whether a government should decide about the architect of these new constructions or should the innovative ideas of constructors prevail. Many believe governments should be having the control in order to have an equal distribution of developmental funding. However, others feel that world should not be deprived of these masterpieces of art. Both sides of the argument will be discussed in this essay before a conclusion is made.

Those who are in favour of the argument, support their view point mainly, by spotlighting the developing countries. For example, in India, there is no explanation of having large slums in the back yard of high rise buildings of Mumbai, where people live below poverty line. This show, providing government the authority can possibly result in equal distribution of construction funds. It is thus understandable why many people support this stance.

On the other hand, many argue that it should be the sweet will of the financer to decide about building’s outlook. This is very well supported by the fact that world would not have seen Petronas towers of Malaysia, Burj Khalifa of Dubai or the Empire state building of New York, had their constructors not been allowed what they thought. When looking at the discussion in this light, the importance of builder’s decision in designing their monuments can be seen.

After examining both schools of thoughts, it is felt that governments must intervene when thoughts are finalized in raising a construction. Being a citizen of a developing nation, I cannot assimilate the idea of living hand to mouth in a city where few others are enjoying life in a skyscraper. Thus, it is hoped nations around the world responsibly design their infrastructures.

Essay 22 (Student’s country: Thailand)

It is obvious for us to see that there are a number of new modern buildings in the most of the capital cities. Some social commentators argue that the style of the building should be regulated by the center. Other group of those oppose that the owner or those who support construction should have a right to choose their individual design. From my perspective, I pay a bit more support to the latter compare with the former. In this essay, I will discuss my view on both sides.

On the one side, there are some benefits for the government to control the building ‘s style. This is particularly the case, for the reason of management, it is easy for the state to plan their assistance and save victims in the case of emergency. Furthermore, for the beautiful scenery of the town, if one watch them from the sky, it certainly make more impression in comparison to the messy and untidy one.

Onother side to oppose this argument is the owner ‘s right and freedom. For instance, the exotic builings is one of the strategies to persuate the customer and make more profit. With the restriction to design, the financial person might leave this city and invest in another country. Moreover, it is worth pointing out that some bizzard shape of the buildings are fascinating; consequencely, these enhance the tourism of the city.

In conclusion, from my analysis, it is more economical advantage for the city to let the owner choose their design of the building on their own.

Essay 23 (Student’s country: India)
Note: This essay is 361 words long.

Basically, number of buildings represents the growth of a city or a nation. So, to have these buildings placed in a quite manner we need certain rules and regulations and for that government should be the prime controller of it.

Obviously population is uncontrollable, inspite of governments efficient steps. Owing to this, large number of new buildings are built throughout the globe. In addition to this, a huge growth in technology is also a vital factor for new constructions. Because of this growth, space becomes much congested which results in pollution and intolerable traffic. To have a grip in this issue the government should work by the book. Moreover, they should take terrific steps without any mercy in destructing the buildings which have crossed its line.

In my point of view, there are few reasons for which law should be a controller. Firstly, to provide neat environment which is always needed to lead people in a doozy manner. Nextly, “Everybody is equal under law” so that MNC’s will also have rules to build their plans. At last, to spread the buildings equally throughout the city to overcome more-congestion state.

On the other hand side of the coin, if a controller is given to a financier despite future hazards he tends to build it up huge through illegal ways. Furthermore, to fulfill his need he may even extend up to un-noticeable murders and to grab land from poor people whom will have no place to hang their belongings after that which is insane.

In contrast, some argue that huge IT industry buildings are needed to balance the country’s economical level. I agree with them all, but those buildings should be built in a genuine manner for non-stop service. My two cents worth advice is to build those buildings outside the city to prevent earlier stated traffic & pollution.

To put this in a nutshell, government should steer-clear of its lethargic nature and it is only possible through a iron hand to restrict constructions in the name of law. Thus, to fly as high as kite in peace environment government should be a mandatory controller of new constructions.

Essay 24 (Student’s country: Kuwait)

Today, there are a lot of buildings in each town. Some of these building are different and others are unique. This can be seen in numerous foundation and houses in one country. It is believed that the structure of a newly building in large cities has to be controlled by authorities and the cost must be unlimited to establish a suitable one. This can be shown by taking into account the role of governments to construct the buildings as well as their budget to these buildings.

Looking first the unique shaped buildings in big cities which decided by the governments. They give beautiful view to these towns. Take Spain for instance. Spain has a wonderful scenery because of the authorities are the main responsible to plan how to decide each building especially in rural areas. By looking to this example, it is clear that if people decide to build their houses, they could be different in shape and this lead the country like a mess in its shape. Thus, there is no doubt that the role of the governments in building has a comprehensive strategy to give a good view for the country.

From a different perspective, another important argument in this regard is that buildings which express the character of the country have to be allocated as much money as needed. To illustrate that, there are a lot of museums in ancient countries such as China and Egypt. In spite of these museums are built recently, they have wonderful appearance because of the money the governments are spending, as most of museums contain very old relic things. So, it is very obvious that financial support to these building is very important to preserve them.

After conducting both areas of analysis of the governments,role and the money spend on building. As has been proven, the same manner the governments use to build a building and the unlimited spending to these building are very integral for each new building. I strongly agree that authority of any country has to be responsible for new building as well as to spend money as needed for such buildings. I is recommended to establish an organization in each town to deal with building and architecture.

Essay 25 (Student’s country: unknown)

In a modern era it is hard to find big cities without any construction. Some believe that such type of construction should be controlled while other think it is good growth for cities. I will discuss both positive and negative effect of designing a new building in urban areas and state my opinion.

On the one hand, it is considerable that why some people like to have new designed site in their area. For example, if contractor designed for office building then it will definitely bring more opportunity for people to have an employment. Moreover, in rapid growing century everyone would like to live in developed area rather than old fashioned areas. In addition, new designed buildings enhance the value of the areas as well as play important role in economic structure. This example shows that why people prefer to adopt new construction in big cities.

On the other hand, many people feel that construction should be controlled because it makes cities more congested. Because of this might public have to suffer with heavy traffic in cities areas. Another reason for prevention of it is more and more are attracted towards developed area as a result the price of the land and building are rise which cause financial crisis for people. Governments and contractors could be suffered with this. Therefore, it makes everything expensive which is possible for everyone t afford. After analysis, it is understood that that much growth might be not suitable for people as well as city so, it is essential to controlled new construction in big cities.

In conclusion, newly designed buildings brings more benefits and opportunities for people. That mean, having a new building in cities has more advantages than disadvantages therefore, it detrimental effect can be negligible.

Essay 26 (Student’s country: unknown)

In today’s world building construction is increasing manifold. In metropolitan cities people build various buildings requiring different building approval. The argument that whether in urban areas its’ the builders who have their final say or the government should regulate such civil projects. Both these sides will be analysed before a final conclusion will be drawn.

As the government has the technical know-how, building permits will ensure the greater protection across the cities. To illustrate this, after the 2009 bushfire in Victoria, local government has introduced various safety measures for the homes located on the fringes of the green lands and forests. Compliance with such safety measures not only guarantees the protection of new building but also secures its residents lives. So it is obvious that for the sustainable and safer urban growth building license is desirable.

However on the other hand of this squabble occasionally too much red-tapism and bureaucracy becomes a hassle in obtaining building consents from authorities. To prove this, some state governments in India charge a hefty building permit fee and to clear all formalities permission seeker often require bribing to the dealing officials. This example proves clearing such tedious procedures are very cumbersome and halts the new constructions. Thus it makes it clear why the construction should be without government intervention.

In summary, both the sides of the argument that who should design the buildings have strong support. After analysing both sides it is clear that owner’s liberty to design building without government endorsement cannot be supported. However, it is suggested that government should act as an ordinance authority and make it less onerous rules for new building permits.

Essay 27 (Student’s country: unknown)

In today’s world there is an increasing trend to make new buildings. Construction design of these buildings is becoming a major issue everywhere. In this essay, the argument that government should control the design of these buildings is subject that both supported and refuted by many. Both sides of this argument will bw analysed before a reasoned conclusion.

Firstly, it can be seen in many countries Governments involve for design big buildings as it is some time could be a matter social issue. For example, sometime if a building, especially a big building could be harmful for the surroundings if it is not constructed according to geographical structure. Moreover, Government has the responsibility to protect public from any harmful actions by the people. For all of these reasons and more it is clear that Governments should have a great role to design a new building.

However, on the other side of this argument it must be remembered that authority of design should only for those who do the finance. For instance, it is understood that those who spend money would have a good self satisfaction if they build up as per their thoughts. Therefore, as the matter of self satisfaction it should be free for people who spend money on it. It is obvious that, those who do finance are the right persons to design their building as they own it.

In summary, both side of the argument regarding the possibility of designing building construction have strong support. However, after analyzing both camps it is clear that the idea of designing building by Government cannot be supported. As such, it is predicted that negative points of the debute over the Government involvement forever be stronger than the positive ones and because of this those who spend money should be responsible to design it

Essay 28 (Student’s country: Vietnam)

Nowadays, the razing of old buildings, especially in big cities, to make room for new buildings is happened frequently. Although, some people think that the investors can design architecture of the new constructions freely, I believe that it is better if they are built under control of governments.

There are some advantages of constructing new buildings without limitation. They can be very different from their neighbors in color or sharp and become an identifiable symbol the buildings. A good example for this is Kansas City Public Library, United State, attractive features of Kansas’s city, was designed look like a bookshelf. It is the only one building in the world in that sharp. Freely construction somehow offers benefits not only for the edifices but also for the cities where they are located.

Each new building contributes to the overall urban design of the city. However, unusual or over-creativity on construction brings together many problems. For instance, it is not suitable if someone try to build a skyscraper in the center of Hoi An city, an ancient city in Viet Nam. It will cause social inequality, destroy ecosystem and influence on sustainable development. Therefore, governments should make a good urban planning and promulgate official plan policies to control newly constructed buildings.

In conclusion, despite the advantages of freely design new architecture in big cities, it seems to me that every newly constructed building should be censored by an Urban Planning Office to make sure that it fit in the urban development strategy.

Essay 29 (Student’s country: Czech Republic)

During the economic boom in Europe the demand for new properties inreased rapidly.
Thus, developers constracted the anourmes number of new buildings in the cities. According to one camp, governments should control the design of new buildings however according to the other who believe that the design should be free from regulations for those who finance it.
Both sides will be critiqued before reasoned conclusion is found.

On the one hand,every city has a historically unique character therefore building developments should be controlled to keep similar design of the place. For example,on my holiday in Reykjavik,the capital city of Iceland,I could see how one modern glassed building erected into the historically styled centre of the town absolutely ruined the character of the place.
The example shows clearly that the design of new buildings should be under some governments regulations.

On the other hand, to maintain traditional look of the cities can be for developers more expensive which will be reflected in to final price of the property. For the same reason it can strangle in the market to be sold or rented.

After analysing these two points of view,it is felt that the merits of the governments regulations in building design can be seen. It has thus been proven that new modern buildings could destroyed the charecter of the town.I hope that our architecture will be also admired by next generations.

Essay 30 (Student’s country: Egypt)

Nowadays, most of modern cities are recognized by their landmarks which are range from historical locations to the newly constructed buildings. Although some see architecture design of the buildings should be left up to the architect imaginations, others believe that the government should be involved in the new buildings that are taken place in the city. Generally, newly designed buildings should follow city characteritic and type as they are part of the city identity. This will be explained from both points of view.

Architecture design is considered part of arts. As a result, it is seen by some as if it should be done according to the designer creation without any type of interference from authorities. Thus government should has nothing to do with newly constructed premises. Take some big cities such as Cairo the government only control the heights of the buildings. By observing the city for instant, we can find all types of constructions in any given district. You can see modern, postmodern along with historical building in one area. Beside the wide variety of colors used in new buildings. That contrast adds richness to the city diversity. Thus, the freedom that is given to the new builders is seen as a positive aspect

On the other hand, others see the city outline should be organized by the government. In the other words, there should be an urban planner to each city who controls the type and the shape of the new buildings. Therefore, the designers should follow the authority’s requirements. For example, city like Toronto all office buildings have the same type wither from the outside façade or from the interior. As a result no one can be confused between office and residential buildings

All in all, both points of view, whether the government shouldn’t have the control of the mew buildings or if the newly constructed buildings should follow the government rules, have their own reasons. At the end every city better has its own buildings’ type and identity. That only can achieve by the authority organizations

Essay 31 (Student’s country: Nigeria)

The desire of everyone who lives on earth is to own a building now or in future. At times, government enacts laws that regulate owning a building .This essay aims at weighing the pros and cons of government wanting to dictate the design of a structure erected by a citizen.
In my opinion, I feel government should not control the design of a house that is built by nationals.

First, it will be an encroachment on the rights of the citizenry. Anyone who finances the construction of a building should be allowed to complete it. Why should government want to give a design to a structure not built by it? Second, a building is a personal property, controlling the design of a building means interfering in the personal affairs of the people. As long as the laws of the land do not restrict the setting up of a building, why should the people not have a free hand to accomplish their desires? In a related development, in Nigeria, we once had a problem, when our government had to demolish some houses in Abuja, because of its plan for the city. This caused a lot of problems for the people and there was a public outcry against it.

On the other hand, government may decide to give the design of a building because it has a plan for that city. Therefore, it would not want the scheme to be distorted. For this reason rulers may be justified. On the other hand, government may have decided that a town would be a tourist attraction, so, for the area to actually have the look that government wants, it may have to exercise control.

In conclusion, whatever the intention of the government the rights of the citizens should be respected.

Essay 32 (Student’s country: Spain)

From the beginning of time, man and architecture have developed together. Today architecture is more and more creative. Some think that the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities should be controlled by governments while others believed that who finance the construction of a building should be free to design it as they see fit .These points of view will be analyzed in this order.

It is clear that construct a building is something that it will be there for many years and its result will influence to the development of the city. A building is a piece of a big group and every piece has to work together, answering to the citizen’s needs. For this reason it is seems perfectly normal that many believe that the government have to control the design of newly building in order the global set works properly.

On the other hand many think that obey rules established by government limit the creativity of architects and artist. As a example it is easy to see so many cities in everywhere and one can not figure out where is it because all these cities are the same as an industrial model without own features. Thus it is clear why many regret about government control.

As long I know I would say that it is totally necessary to reach to an intermediate point which permit architects and artist develop their creative and to have quite control about what the citizen needs.

Essay 33 (Student’s country: China)

To construct a building has never been just fulfilling its functional purposes, but also achieving aesthetic goals, it is therefore argued that the design of newly constructed buildings should be left to those who subsidize the construction, this point will be proved by analysing both sides of opinion listed in this essay.

On the one hand, those who advocate that the design of newly built buildings should be subject to governments’ supervision have a point, as every country and area has its unique architectural styles which has been lasting for a long time, in the light of cultural protection, the government have to ensure that the style of miscellaneous buildings should be in line with the traditional customs, to illustrate, Guangzhou governments built a few pavilions along the Perl River, instead of implementing modern exterior styles, such as glass curtain walls or still poles, the style was entirely traditional, as they have to go with the design of some vernacular dwellers nearby which were built a few centuries ago, thus, it is understandable that the design of new buildings should be controlled by governments.

On the other hand, however, as significant as protecting architectural culture may be, the primary purpose of constructing new buildings is to utilise them, the functionality will justify their designs, for instance, a warehouse should be designed to be as spacious as possible to store the goods, a skyscraper should be strong enough to resist the natural disaster, etc., all of which cannot be achieved by traditional designs, so architects have to find new approaches to conquer obstacles and fulfil functional requirements, as oppose to follow governments’ instructions indiscriminately. So it is clear that those who finance the construction of a building should have the right to design.

After analysing above two points, the conclusion is that who finance the construction of new buildings should have the right to design, as it is only reasonable and pragmatic, but in order to protect cultural identity, it is also recommended that the style can be as closer as the ambiance.

Essay 34 (Student’s country: unknown)

Buildings are constructed in big cities since the dawn of time. Throughout history, it is observed that new buildings are constructed very frequently in big cities, which should be controlled by the government whether it is constructed by government or privately. I agree with the opinion that buildings construction in big cities should be controlled by governments. This argument will be proven by looking at how the government laws are updated.

Firstly, if there is no control on buildings construction at finance companies then the finance companies will be out of control and they will construct buildings anywhere. For example in Dhaka City before the control system imposed by the government the finance companies use to construct buildings with very short spaces between two building which control the air, light flow. But after the law imposed by the government that building owner have to leave 40% free land for gardening of total land used for construction there was rapid progress of the environmental situation. This makes it clear that controlling by the government is a very good effect on buildings construction.

In addition to these finance companies always think about their return, how many times they can upgrade their invested money, not the other issues like environment, peoples facilities etc. It is obvious from this that control by the government is a very good effect on building construction.

Following this look at how government control is very important on building construction it has been proven that buildings construction in big cities should be controlled by the government. Thus I strongly recommended for the government control for the betterment of big cities.

Essay 35 (Student’s country: Indonesia)

In my opinion, the design of construction should not be controlled by government. Although, some people argued that it should be controlled. This essay will analysed why or why not the construction’s design controlled by government.

First of all, a design of one company’s construction does not have relation to government. Therefore it has to be controlled by the one who related to it. For instance, a company who sell jewelleries can design the building as they want it to be.

Furthermore, government has much more other important things to handle. Things as design should be leave it to designer as the company is the one who pay it, they have the right to do it. It can be seen that, for a long time, in most countries, the construction of a building is done without government control. Therefore it should be kept that way.

On the other hand, a construction of a building should follow the policies. A government have a right to stop a construction if something does not fit. For example, if a company try to build a 500 metre height in housing area, the government will reject it. As it will be a danger to its surround. Therefore, the government should control in certain event.

After analysed, it is clear that the government should not control the design of construction unless it has violated the procedure. I thinks that company are free to design it as they se fit as long as it is follow the rules.

Essay 36 (Student’s country: Vietnam)

Society is more and more developing so we should invest things like facilities to serve our life especially in building field, but some people feel that the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities should be controlled by governments and others contest those who finance the construction of a building should be free to design it as they see fit.

As you know, the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities makes us feel comfortable and proud of when we live in a modern and civilized time, but it also cause some disadvantage for cities.
The first of all, some engineers designing these buildings try to do business with signing a lot of contracts with customers but their quality is not safe enough.

Secondly, if we designed out of land range that the construction law implemented, the residents around our buildings would quarrel with owner of newly constructed building or fight against him or her.
The last, it’s easy for authorities to commit corruption when the government is out of control to newly constructed buildings. They try to use their power to permit the people finance the construction of a building to design it as they see fit.

Otherwise , others contest those who finance the construction of a newly constructed buildings should be free to design it as they see fit. To me, I think when they have money, of course they want to finance for their construction is ok because anyone has money and become rich, all of them want to live in a nice and large houses as what they dream of.

But in general, if all people think so, I wonder where the law is. We should have law to control for instance this situation, and governments should perform their role for managing strictly about the design of newly constructed buildings.

In conclusion, the design of newly constructed building is good. It makes our city become modern and more beautiful . But I think we should be in range of land which government allowed to avoid commit the law of some greedy residents even authorities.

Essay 37 (Student’s country: Bhutan)

These days we can see lots of building and houses with new design, new look and new features coming up in big cities. if we think carefulully ,it is very good to have such kind of new look .But if we turn other side then it is destroying of old culture and heritage.

We can say that ,if there is no contolled over construction of new design then in near future our kid will not able to see our old heritage and old tradational houses..For example ,these day we can hardly see ver little castles in big town.To see castle we have to go to country side. in that way if government don contolled ove the contruction of nes design then there will be day we can not old heritages houses but only in pictures or photo.

But if turn other side of coin,then gov should not controlled over the contraction of new design houses.These days we can see new building which have good condition of water suppld,proper drainage ssyetm,new heating system by using solar energy.So,therefore we should allowe people to use their creative over old traditional.Id old traditional house wen build maximym not more then 10 store where as we can build same house with more than 10 store at same place.

Therefore ,there is both advantages and disadvantage.

eBooks eBooks

eBooks
Academic Task 1: How to write at a 9 level

This eBook groups all information the student needs to know to perform well on Task 1 of their Academic exam.

Buy Now
eBooks
General Task 1: How to write at a 9 level

Learn to write the 6 letter types that appear on the General exam.

Buy Now
eBooks
Academic and General Task 2: How to write at a 9 level

An eBook describing everything necessary to compose a successful essay.

Buy Now

Ryan's Recent Posts Posts

How to get full marks for Task Achievement

The essay in this video was written by IELTS Examiner C. This question was seen recently in Sydney:

These days many people prefer to rent rather than buy their own house. Why is this this so? Discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of renting or buying, and give your own opinion.

Give reasons for your answer and examples from your personal experience where appropriate.

Here is the essay as it appears in the video:

In most major cities in the west, people are opting to rent a home instead of buy. This is mostly because house prices have increased dramatically while personal income has not, a trend that means mortgage repayments now account for a much larger share of income than in the past. Renters have more disposable income every week than buyers and this is a big attraction. However, in my opinion, this is a false economy and in the long run I believe that the advantages of buying a property greatly outweigh the short-term savings to be made by renting.

While it is certainly cheaper week-by-week to rent than pay a mortgage, the renter misses out on the large capital gains to be made when buying a home. When I took out my own mortgage on my two-bedroom apartment, my repayments on a $400,000 loan were about $600 a week, compared with $500 for rental value on a similar property. However, over the past three years my apartment has appreciated by more than $250,000, greatly outweighing the $15,000 I would have saved by renting. In addition to this, my mortgage payments secured an acquisition of property that will remain valuable for my family into the future. Financial growth of this sort is not possible through renting.

Renters do not only lose out on capital gains, they also lose in terms of security and peace of mind. The roof over their heads once their lease is over is always at the mercy of the landlord, who might at any time decide to sell the property. The landlord can also put up the rent when they feel the market warrants it. Further, unless the renter invests their savings judiciously, the money they save will be frittered on day-to-day life, leaving them very much poorer than the buyer once retirement looms.

In conclusion, while a first mortgage will cost more each week than renting, the advantages of buying, including capital appreciation and housing security, greatly outweigh the short-term savings to be made by renting.

Buy my ebooks:

T1 General resized for sale T1 Academic resized for sale 2017 Task 2 ebook cover PNG file

My Academic Task 1 ebook has been updated!

 AWT1 small

$19 USD

  • 6+ years of ongoing development and classroom testing
  • 74 pages
  • 10+ band 9 model answers
  • Examiner approved
  • Purchase once; receive all future ebook updates FREE!

all-cc-logos

Paypal-Button

Have you purchased an earlier copy? Email me to receive the update FREE of charge: ryan@ieltsielts.com

Other questions? Leave a voicemail: 001-888-820-8546 Contact me on WeChat: ieltsnetwork

 

Just 60 minutes to better IELTS Speaking!

Click here to download an MP3 copy of the conversation.

Buy Ryan’s Task 2 ebook (2017 version!) Click the Table of Contents to see what’s inside:
2017 Task 2 ebook cover PNG file TOC small

$19 USD! Get an automatic email delivery in two minutes:

buy-now-1

Did you know I have ebooks for both modules of IELTS Writing? Have a look: http://ieltsielts.com/study-with-ryan/

Band 9 writing under an X-ray!

Thanks to ‘Examiner C’ for this model. Here is the essay as it appears in the video:

Many people think that public celebrations (like national holidays, festivals, etc.) are a waste of money and that the government should spend these funds in a better way.

Do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and examples from personal experience where appropriate.

National holidays cost countries and their governments a lot of money. Wages need to be paid to employees despite their absence from work, and a national loss in productivity is experienced. For these reasons, some people suggest governments do away with holidays and instead spend the money on worthy projects. While this might seem at first to be a practical suggestion, I disagree strongly for a number of reasons.

Firstly, it is axiomatic that a country’s production of goods declines when workers are not working; however, this is a tiny part of a much larger economic picture. Productivity is a function not only of hours worked but also of energy, drive, and morale. Thus, national holidays, which give workers a chance to relax and to celebrate aspects of their country and their lives, make for a happier and more productive workforce. In Australia, for example, the long weekend is a tradition that helps to unify society by making all feel rewarded and valued in a common enterprise and identity. It is for these reasons that labelling public celebrations ‘a waste of money’ cannot be supported.

Further, having the financial means to start new national projects is a good thing, but the question of apportioning funds in a manner that an entire society agrees is ‘a better way’ is simply unrealistic. A further consideration is the ramifications of pressure put on workers to work 52 straight weeks a year, a policy that could lead to stress-related illnesses and serious social problems. As this shows, the cancelling of public holidays and redirection of funds is an implausible suggestion.

In conclusion, I must affirm that while it is tempting to realise the short-term increase in productivity and savings that would result from abolishing public holidays, the overall cost greatly outweighs the gains.

Buy Ryan’s Task 2 ebook (2017 version!) Click the Table of Contents to see what’s inside:
2017 Task 2 ebook cover PNG file TOC small

$19 USD! Get an automatic email delivery in two minutes:

buy-now-1

Did you know I have ebooks for both modules of IELTS Writing? Have a look: http://ieltsielts.com/study-with-ryan/

A former examiner wrote this band 9 essay…

Buy Ryan’s Task 2 ebook (2017 version!) Click the Table of Contents to see what’s inside:
2017 Task 2 ebook cover PNG file TOC small

$19 USD! Get an automatic email delivery in two minutes:

buy-now-1

Watch a second video like the above here: https://www.patreon.com/ieltsryan

Here is the essay as it appears in the video:

Many people believe that a large proportion of a country’s health budget should be diverted from treatment to spending on health education and preventative measures. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give examples from personal experience where appropriate.

Modern medicine has evolved along two lines: prevention and cure. Many believe that too much emphasis is placed on the latter and that the balance of national health spending should shift to prevention. I am inclined to agree; however, my support is with the stipulation that an imbalance in the other direction should be avoided.

Many modern diseases that require pharmaceutical or surgical intervention, such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer, are induced by poor lifestyle choices. There is an abundance of evidence that these conditions are brought on by such factors as smoking, excessive dietary fat and sugar, and a lack of physical exercise. I have myself lost several family members to cancers and heart disease caused by smoking. Because the cost of treating these diseases is very high, and the prognosis uncertain, the need for preventative intervention is clear.

Fulfilling this need could be exercised in a number of ways. For one, the government could provide more health and fitness centres, and mount a public awareness campaign to encourage people to use them. In addition to this, taxes could be placed on excessive salt or sugar in processed foods, and special taxes could be added to tobacco products to discourage their use. I believe that measures such as these will in the long term dramatically reduce the incidence of certain deadly diseases.

However, it should be remembered that not all examples of modern disease are preventable or predictable, and it is critical to maintain research into cures for all diseases. Thus, in diverting health spending from treatment to preventative measures, countries should encourage a balanced approach to help extend lifespans and maximise quality of life. Prevention may be better than cure, but it can never wholly replace it.

Did you enjoy the above exercise? Watch another one for $1 USD (click ‘Rent’ in the top right corner):

Read All Posts