A Tall Building You Like or Dislike

Part 3 follow-up questions

These are the discussion questions examiners asked after this cue card. Sample answers are shown where available.

1. 1. How usual is it in your country to live in tall buildings?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct assessment ("becoming more usual, but still quite new") and supports it with one plain contrast between the family house and a colleague's new flat, using simple connectors like "but" and "because".

   It is becoming more usual, but it is still quite new. My parents live in a typical Vietnamese house in Hue, which is narrow and has four floors, with a door onto the street. That is what most people still think of as a home. But in cities like Hanoi and Da Nang, tall apartment buildings with twenty or thirty floors are appearing quickly. A colleague of mine just bought a flat on the eighteenth floor because houses in the city cost too much now. Older people often dislike them, since living without ground feels strange to them.

   Why this band

   • FC“That is what most people still think of as a home.” — This short sentence restates the previous point plainly rather than folding it into the surrounding description. A 7.0 answer would more likely attach this idea directly onto the sentence about the house instead of stating it separately.
   • LR“tall apartment buildings with twenty or thirty floors are appearing quickly” — This is a plain, literal description using the basic verb "appearing" rather than a more vivid or specific one. A higher band would likely choose a more image-based verb for the same idea.
   • GRA“My parents live in a typical Vietnamese house in Hue, which is narrow and has four floors, with a door onto the street.” — A single relative clause ("which is narrow and has four floors") is added onto the main sentence, along with a trailing prepositional phrase, accurate but structurally plain compared to higher bands.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer adds the reflective hedge "I'd say" and uses a dash-linked list ("four narrow floors, one family, a door onto the street") to describe the house, giving the answer a more natural spoken rhythm than the 6.5 version.

   Increasingly usual, but still fairly new, I'd say. My parents live in a typical Vietnamese 'tube house' in Hue — four narrow floors, one family, a door onto the street — and that's still what most people picture when they think of home. In Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City and now Da Nang, apartment towers of twenty or thirty floors have gone up fast, and young couples, like a colleague of mine who just bought a flat on the eighteenth floor, choose them because an actual house in the city has become almost impossible to afford. Older people often dislike them, since a home without any ground under it feels somehow wrong to them.

   Why this band

   • FC“Increasingly usual, but still fairly new, I'd say” — The hedge "I'd say" is attached to the opening claim as a spoken qualifier, softening a direct assessment in a way the flatter opening of a 6.5 answer does not.
   • LR“apartment towers of twenty or thirty floors have gone up fast” — "Gone up fast" is a more natural, idiomatic phrasal verb than the plain "appearing quickly" a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“young couples, like a colleague of mine who just bought a flat on the eighteenth floor, choose them because an actual house in the city has become almost impossible to afford” — A non-restrictive example ("like a colleague of mine who just bought a flat on the eighteenth floor") is inserted between the subject and the verb, a moderately complex structure beyond the simple sentences of a 6.5 answer.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the precise phrase "shot up in a matter of years" and the specific cultural detail about "the ancestral altar", ending with the compact closing line "largely out of necessity, and mostly among the young".

   Increasingly usual, though still relatively new. My parents live in a typical Vietnamese 'tube house' in Hue — four narrow floors, one family, a door straight onto the street — and that remains most people's mental picture of home. In Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City and now Da Nang, apartment towers of twenty or thirty storeys have shot up in a matter of years, and young couples, a colleague of mine among them, are choosing them simply because a house in the city has slipped out of reach financially. Older people, meanwhile, tend to resist the shift; a home with no ground beneath it feels wrong to them, and there's nowhere left for the ancestral altar to face the street. So it's common now, largely out of necessity, and mostly among the young.

   Why this band

   • FC“and there's nowhere left for the ancestral altar to face the street” — This specific, culturally precise detail is added almost in passing as a second reason within the same sentence, a more compact and knowing way of building an argument than a 6.5 answer's plain single-reason sentences.
   • LR“apartment towers of twenty or thirty storeys have shot up in a matter of years” — "Shot up" is a vivid, less-common phrasal verb choice compared to the plainer "gone up fast" a 7.0 answer would use, painting a sharper image of rapid change.
   • GRA“young couples, a colleague of mine among them, are choosing them simply because a house in the city has slipped out of reach financially” — The appositive "a colleague of mine among them" is inserted without a relative pronoun, a more compressed construction than the "like a colleague of mine who..." relative clause a 7.0 answer would use for the same idea.

2. 2. What are the disadvantages of living in a very tall building?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer leads with one clear problem ("everything depends on things working properly"), tells one short story to prove it, then lists two more problems using the plain connector "also".

   The biggest problem is that everything depends on things working properly. During a power cut last summer, my colleague on the eighteenth floor had no electricity, so there was no lift and no water. She had to carry her shopping up eighteen flights of stairs in very hot weather. Fire is also a worry, because it is slow to escape from a high floor. There is also less contact with neighbours, because you meet them in the lift instead of outside. The building also depends on a management company to fix problems like the water pump.

   Why this band

   • FC“She had to carry her shopping up eighteen flights of stairs in very hot weather.” — This is a short, plain narrative sentence with a simple past structure, stating the fact directly without much colour. A 7.5 answer would likely fold this detail into the previous sentence with a participial phrase instead.
   • LR“There is also less contact with neighbours, because you meet them in the lift instead of outside.” — "Less contact with neighbours" is a plain, general phrase rather than a more vivid or specific description of the same idea. A higher band would likely name this loss more precisely.
   • GRA“During a power cut last summer, my colleague on the eighteenth floor had no electricity, so there was no lift and no water.” — This sentence uses a simple cause-and-result structure with "so", accurate but structurally plain compared to the dash-linked constructions of higher bands.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer names the problem abstractly first ("the dependence on things working") before the story, and uses the natural connector "Beyond emergencies" to move to a second category of problem, adding shape the 6.5 list lacks.

   Mostly, it's the dependence on things working. During a power cut last summer, my colleague on the eighteenth floor discovered that no electricity meant no lift and no water pump, and she ended up carrying her shopping up eighteen flights in thirty-five-degree heat. Fire is the fear underneath that, since escape from a high floor is genuinely slow. Beyond emergencies, there's the daily distance from the street — a neighbour becomes someone you occasionally meet in a lift rather than over a fence, and the whole building depends on a management company that may or may not actually fix the pump. Add the noise from the lift shaft and higher fees, and the view starts to feel expensive.

   Why this band

   • FC“she ended up carrying her shopping up eighteen flights in thirty-five-degree heat” — The phrasal verb "ended up" adds a natural, spoken sense of unintended consequence, something the flatter "had to carry" of a 6.5 answer does not convey.
   • LR“a neighbour becomes someone you occasionally meet in a lift rather than over a fence” — "Over a fence" is a mild, image-based collocation standing in for the plain phrase "less contact with neighbours" a 6.5 answer would use for the same loss.
   • GRA“Add the noise from the lift shaft and higher fees, and the view starts to feel expensive.” — This imperative-plus-result construction ("Add X, and Y happens") is a moderately complex way of summarising several small problems at once, beyond the simple listed sentences of a 6.5 answer.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer opens with the compact fragment "Dependence on things working, mostly" and closes with the vivid summary line "the view starts to look expensive", using the reduced passive "a neighbour is someone met in a lift" for economy.

   Dependence on things working, mostly. During a power cut last summer, my colleague on the eighteenth floor discovered that no electricity meant no lift and no water pump, and she carried her shopping up eighteen flights in thirty-five-degree heat. Fire is the fear underneath that; escape from a high floor is slow by nature. Beyond emergencies, there's the daily distance from the street — a child can't just run outside, a neighbour is someone met in a lift rather than over a fence, and the whole building leans on a management company that may or may not bother fixing the pump. Throw in wind, noise from the lift shaft and steeper fees, and the view starts to look expensive.

   Why this band

   • FC“Dependence on things working, mostly.” — This two-word-plus-fragment opener states the whole answer's thesis before any explanation, a highly compressed construction beyond the full opening sentence a 6.5 or 7.0 answer would use.
   • LR“the whole building leans on a management company that may or may not bother fixing the pump” — "Leans on" is a vivid, slightly idiomatic verb choice replacing the plainer "depends on" a 7.0 answer would repeat, avoiding word repetition while adding character.
   • GRA“a neighbour is someone met in a lift rather than over a fence” — The reduced passive participle "met in a lift" replaces a full relative clause like "someone you meet in a lift", a more compact construction than the fuller relative clauses of lower bands.

3. 3. Will more people live in tall buildings in the future?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer states a direct "Yes" opinion, gives one clear example, and explains the reason in a simple because-clause before mentioning one exception with "but".

   Yes, I think so, especially in cities like mine. The rice fields on Da Nang's edge became apartment towers in just three years. The reason is simple: land is limited, but more people keep moving to cities, so the only way to fit them near jobs is to build upward. Governments prefer this too, since roads and pipes are cheaper to build for one tower than for many houses. Some people might choose to work from home in a small town instead, but for most young families, the choice will be a high floor or a long journey to work.

   Why this band

   • FC“The reason is simple: land is limited, but more people keep moving to cities, so the only way to fit them near jobs is to build upward.” — This sentence announces "The reason is simple" and then lists the reason directly, a plain, slightly repetitive way of introducing an explanation. A 7.5 answer would more likely fold the same idea into a metaphor rather than labelling it as "the reason".
   • LR“the only way to fit them near jobs is to build upward” — "Build upward" is a plain, literal phrase for the idea of increasing density, described directly with no figurative colour.
   • GRA“Some people might choose to work from home in a small town instead, but for most young families, the choice will be a high floor or a long journey to work.” — This sentence uses "but" to join a simple contrast, accurate but structurally plain, without any embedded clause or fronted phrase.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer uses the natural image "a forest of apartment towers" and hedges its prediction with "I'd say" and "There'll be a bit of a counter-trend", giving the argument more nuance than the flat 6.5 version.

   Almost certainly, I'd say, in cities like mine at least. The rice fields on the western edge of Da Nang turned into a forest of apartment towers in about three years, and the reason really is just arithmetic: land is finite, populations are still moving to cities, and the only way to fit more people near jobs is upward. Governments prefer it too, since dense housing is cheaper to serve with roads, pipes and transport. There'll be a bit of a counter-trend, since remote work now lets some people choose a house in a small town instead, but for most young families in Asia, it'll come down to a high floor or a long commute.

   Why this band

   • FC“Almost certainly, I'd say, in cities like mine at least” — The double hedge "I'd say" and "at least" softens a confident opening claim in a natural, spoken way, more textured than the flatter "Yes, I think so" of a 6.5 answer.
   • LR“turned into a forest of apartment towers” — "A forest of apartment towers" is a natural, image-based collocation, more vivid than the plain description "became a whole area of apartment towers" a 6.5 answer would use.
   • GRA“the reason really is just arithmetic: land is finite, populations are still moving to cities, and the only way to fit more people near jobs is upward” — A colon introduces a list of three clauses explaining the metaphor "arithmetic", a moderately complex structure beyond the simple "the reason is" sentence of a 6.5 answer.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the compact appositive "the reason is arithmetic, plain and simple" and ends with the sharpened contrast "not whether, but whether the towers are built well enough", a more pointed closing than the plainer bands.

   Almost certainly, in cities like mine. The rice fields on the western edge of Da Nang became a forest of apartment towers in three years, and the reason is arithmetic, plain and simple: land is finite, populations are still moving to cities, and the only way to fit more people near jobs is upward. Governments prefer it too, since dense housing is cheaper to serve with roads, pipes and transport. There'll be a counter-current — remote work is letting some people choose a house in a small town instead — but for most young families in Asia, the choice will come down to a high floor or a long commute. The real question isn't whether, but whether the towers are built well enough to be good places to grow old in.

   Why this band

   • FC“The real question isn't whether, but whether the towers are built well enough to be good places to grow old in.” — This closing sentence uses a parallel "not X, but Y" structure to reframe the whole question, a more sophisticated rhetorical move than the simple contrastive "but for most young families" sentence a 6.5 answer ends on.
   • LR“the reason is arithmetic, plain and simple” — "Plain and simple" appended to "arithmetic" is an idiomatic intensifying phrase, more distinctive than the flatter "the reason really is just arithmetic" a 7.0 answer uses for the same idea.
   • GRA“There'll be a counter-current — remote work is letting some people choose a house in a small town instead — but for most young families in Asia, the choice will come down to a high floor or a long commute.” — A dash-bracketed clause interrupts the main sentence to add a qualifying idea before the sentence continues, a flexible construction beyond the simple "but"-joined sentence a 6.5 answer would write.

4. 4. Can a country's climate influence the design of its buildings?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct "Yes" opinion with one clear before-and-after contrast (old Hue houses vs. modern towers), joined with plain connectors like "but" and "because".

   Yes, and it did in the past. The old houses in Hue have deep verandas, high ceilings and courtyards, which let air move through and keep the heat out without any machines. People who built them understood the weather well. But modern glass towers are the opposite; they are sealed boxes that need air conditioning all year, as if they were built for a cold country. Climate also affects buildings elsewhere, like snowy roofs or houses on stilts in flood zones. Cheap electricity let architects forget about the weather, but that is now changing because energy costs are rising.

   Why this band

   • FC“People who built them understood the weather well.” — This short sentence restates the previous idea plainly as a separate sentence rather than integrating it into the description of the houses. A 7.5 answer would more likely compress this into an appositive phrase instead.
   • LR“Cheap electricity let architects forget about the weather” — "Let architects forget about the weather" is a plain, direct description without any figurative language. A higher band would likely use a more vivid verb for the same idea.
   • GRA“modern glass towers are the opposite; they are sealed boxes that need air conditioning all year, as if they were built for a cold country” — This sentence uses a semicolon and an "as if" clause, which is a slightly more advanced link, but the overall structure still relies on straightforward description rather than compression.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer adds the reflective "honestly it used to" and the summarising clause "What's changed is that...", giving the historical contrast a more natural, spoken shape than the 6.5 list of facts.

   It should, and honestly it used to. The old houses in Hue have deep verandas, high ceilings, tiled floors and courtyards, all of which pull air through and keep the heat out without a single machine — they were designed by people who genuinely understood the monsoon. Modern glass towers are pretty much the opposite: sealed boxes that need air conditioning twelve months a year, built to a design that would make more sense in a cold country. Climate shapes buildings elsewhere too, like steep roofs in snowy places or stilts in flood zones. What's changed is that cheap electricity let architects ignore the weather, and now rising energy costs are forcing them to remember it.

   Why this band

   • FC“It should, and honestly it used to.” — The spoken connector "honestly" turns a plain factual claim into a reflective aside, something the flatter "Yes, it should, and in the past it did" of a 6.5 answer does not do.
   • LR“they were designed by people who genuinely understood the monsoon” — "Genuinely understood the monsoon" is a more precise, evocative phrase than the plain "understood the weather well" a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“What's changed is that cheap electricity let architects ignore the weather, and now rising energy costs are forcing them to remember it” — A cleft construction ("What's changed is that...") introduces the closing explanation, a moderately complex structure beyond the simple "but that is now changing because" sentence a 6.5 answer would use.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the vivid phrase "understood the monsoon down to the angle of a roof" and closes with the evaluative sentence adverb "tellingly" in "look a little more like the old ones again".

   It should, and it once did. The old houses in Hue have deep verandas, high ceilings, tiled floors and courtyards, all of which pull air through and keep the heat out without a single machine, built by people who understood the monsoon down to the angle of a roof. Modern glass towers are the opposite — sealed boxes needing air conditioning twelve months a year, designed as if the local weather were an inconvenience rather than a fact. Climate shapes roofs in snowy places, stilts in flood zones, thick walls in deserts. What changed is that cheap electricity let architects ignore the weather for a while, and rising energy costs and heat are now quietly forcing them to remember. The best new buildings here, tellingly, look a little more like the old ones again.

   Why this band

   • FC“The best new buildings here, tellingly, look a little more like the old ones again.” — The sentence adverb "tellingly" inserted mid-sentence adds a small evaluative comment as the answer closes, a more idiomatic touch than the plain final sentence a 6.5 answer would write.
   • LR“built by people who understood the monsoon down to the angle of a roof” — "Down to the angle of a roof" is a vivid, less-common idiom expressing precision, well beyond the plain "understood the weather well" a 6.5 answer would say.
   • GRA“designed as if the local weather were an inconvenience rather than a fact” — This "as if" clause uses the subjunctive "were" and a contrastive noun pair ("an inconvenience rather than a fact"), a more flexible, literary construction than the simpler "as if they were built for a cold country" a 6.5 answer would use.

5. 5. Why do some people decide to design their own house?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer opens with one clear example (the uncle's graph paper), states the main reason in a because-clause, and lists two more reasons briefly using "or".

   My uncle in Hue drew his own house on graph paper because no builder would agree to put the kitchen at the front, where he actually cooks and talks to the street. So some people design their own home because normal designs are made for a normal life, but they do not live that way. Other people want to save the money they would pay an architect, or they enjoy having full control over the design. For some people, it is a way to show who they are. The results can be wonderful, or sometimes a bit strange.

   Why this band

   • FC“The results can be wonderful, or sometimes a bit strange.” — This short closing sentence gives a plain, direct judgement using "or", without any elaboration. A 7.0 answer would more likely widen the range with a stronger contrast instead of the mild "a bit strange".
   • LR“they enjoy having full control over the design” — This is plain, general vocabulary ("full control") rather than a more specific or vivid phrase for the same idea.
   • GRA“So some people design their own home because normal designs are made for a normal life, but they do not live that way.” — This sentence repeats the word "normal" twice and uses a simple "but"-clause, accurate but not varied in vocabulary or structure.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer uses the dash to link the example directly to the general point ("some people design their own home simply because...") and adds the reflective closing "but I understand the impulse".

   My uncle in Hue drew his own house on graph paper because no builder would put the kitchen at the front, where he actually cooks and talks to the street — some people design their own home simply because standard designs are built for a standard life they don't lead. Others want to save the architect's fee, or they enjoy the control, or they've lived in enough bad houses to know exactly what they want. For some, honestly, it's an expression of identity, maybe the one big creative act of their life. The results range from wonderful to structurally alarming, but I understand the impulse.

   Why this band

   • FC“For some, honestly, it's an expression of identity, maybe the one big creative act of their life” — The spoken hedges "honestly" and "maybe" are inserted into the sentence to soften a fairly strong claim, a natural conversational move a 6.5 answer's plain statement would not include.
   • LR“The results range from wonderful to structurally alarming” — "Structurally alarming" is a moderately elevated, slightly wry collocation, more specific than the plain "a bit strange" a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“some people design their own home simply because standard designs are built for a standard life they don't lead” — A relative clause without a relative pronoun ("a standard life they don't lead") is embedded at the end of the sentence, a moderately complex structure beyond the repeated "normal...normal" phrasing of a 6.5 answer.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the precise verb "relish" and closes with the compact, reflective observation "a house is the only object most of us will ever shape entirely around ourselves" as its evaluative final touch.

   My uncle in Hue drew his own house on graph paper because no builder would put the kitchen at the front, where he actually cooks and talks to the street — some people design their own home precisely because standard designs are built for a standard life they don't lead. Others want to save the architect's fee, or relish the control, or have lived in enough bad houses to know exactly what they want. For some it's an expression of identity, the one big creative act most people ever get. The results range from wonderful to structurally alarming, and yet the impulse behind them makes complete sense to me; a house is the only object most of us will ever shape entirely around ourselves.

   Why this band

   • FC“the impulse behind them makes complete sense to me; a house is the only object most of us will ever shape entirely around ourselves” — This closing observation uses a semicolon to attach a small generalising insight to the personal reaction, a more reflective, compact move than the flatter closing sentence a 6.5 answer would write.
   • LR“Others want to save the architect's fee, or relish the control” — "Relish" is a precise, less-common verb choice in place of the plain "enjoy" a 6.5 or 7.0 answer would use for the same idea, adding a slightly more vivid register.
   • GRA“For some it's an expression of identity, the one big creative act most people ever get” — An appositive noun phrase ("the one big creative act most people ever get") is attached directly after a comma with no linking word, a compact construction more flexible than a full relative clause.

6. 6. How challenging do you think the job of an architect is?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a direct opinion ("more difficult than it looks"), supports it with one clear example, and lists two further points using "also", each in its own sentence.

   I think it's more difficult than it looks. An architect friend of mine redesigned one house eleven times in a year because the client's mother-in-law kept changing her mind about the stairs. This shows a normal problem: an architect has to please the client, the budget, the building rules, the site and the weather all at the same time, and they do not always agree. The technical side is also serious, because a mistake in a building could hurt people. Also, most buildings that get built are not as good as the architect first designed, which must be frustrating.

   Why this band

   • FC“This shows a normal problem: an architect has to please the client, the budget, the building rules, the site and the weather all at the same time, and they do not always agree.” — This long sentence lists five things joined with commas and "and", which is accurate but relies on simple listing rather than a more compressed structure. A 7.5 answer would likely turn this list into a single vivid image instead.
   • LR“The technical side is also serious, because a mistake in a building could hurt people.” — This is a plain, direct statement of consequence using the basic verb "hurt" rather than a more precise or formal term for serious harm.
   • GRA“Also, most buildings that get built are not as good as the architect first designed, which must be frustrating.” — A relative clause ("which must be frustrating") is tacked onto the end of the sentence, accurate but structurally basic, without any fronting or compression.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer opens with the reflective "honestly" and moves through its points with the natural connectors "too" and "Then there's", giving the list more spoken flow than the 6.5 version.

   More than it looks from the outside, honestly. An architect friend of mine redesigned one family's house eleven times over a year because the client's mother-in-law kept changing her mind about the stairs, and that's the ordinary challenge really: an architect serves the client, the budget, the building code, the site, the neighbours and the weather all at once, and they don't all agree. The technical demands are heavy too — a mistake in a building can genuinely kill people, and the liability lasts for decades. Then there's the frustration that most of what actually gets built is a compromise, while the beautiful version stays on paper.

   Why this band

   • FC“More than it looks from the outside, honestly.” — This clipped opening answers the question in a fragment before the reflective "honestly", a more conversational rhythm than the full opening sentence a 6.5 answer would write.
   • LR“a mistake in a building can genuinely kill people, and the liability lasts for decades” — "Genuinely" and "liability" are more precise, weightier word choices than the plain "could hurt people" a 6.5 answer would use for the same point.
   • GRA“Then there's the frustration that most of what actually gets built is a compromise, while the beautiful version stays on paper” — An existential construction ("there's the frustration that...") introduces a noun clause, followed by a "while"-contrast, a moderately complex structure beyond the simple relative clause a 6.5 answer would use.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the precise idiom "by some distance" and "in miniature", then closes with the self-deprecating contrast "As a designer of screens, I have it easy" as an evaluative final touch.

   More than it looks from the outside, by some distance. An architect friend of mine redesigned one family's house eleven times in a year because the client's mother-in-law kept changing her mind about the stairs, which is the ordinary challenge in miniature: an architect answers to the client, the budget, the building code, the site, the neighbours and the weather all at once, none of whom agree with each other. The technical demands are unforgiving — a mistake can genuinely kill someone, and the liability follows an architect for decades. Then there's the quieter frustration that most of what actually gets built is a compromise, the beautiful version left behind on paper. As a designer of screens, I have it easy; my mistakes get fixed with an update.

   Why this band

   • FC“As a designer of screens, I have it easy; my mistakes get fixed with an update.” — This closing sentence uses a fronted participial phrase ("As a designer of screens") and a semicolon to add a self-deprecating comparison, a more idiomatic, reflective close than the plain relative clause a 6.5 answer ends on.
   • LR“More than it looks from the outside, by some distance.” — "By some distance" is a genuinely idiomatic intensifying phrase, more distinctive than the plain "honestly" a 7.0 answer uses in the same position.
   • GRA“which is the ordinary challenge in miniature: an architect answers to the client, the budget, the building code, the site, the neighbours and the weather all at once, none of whom agree with each other” — The closing phrase "none of whom agree with each other" replaces a separate clause like "and they do not always agree", a more compact, flexible construction folding the contrast into the same noun phrase.

7. 7. Should new buildings not be constructed in historical city centres or downtowns?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer gives a clear position in the first sentence ("should be allowed, but not any kind") and develops it with one example and one plain "so" conclusion.

   New buildings should be allowed, but not any kind of building. A glass hotel was built a few years ago near Hue's old citadel walls, and it looks like a mistake that will stay there for a hundred years. After that, the city made stricter rules, but those rules should have existed before. Historical centres are places where people still live, so if we stop all building, they become like museums where nobody can afford to live. So building should continue, but with limits on height and materials, and with the best architects, not the cheapest ones.

   Why this band

   • FC“So building should continue, but with limits on height and materials, and with the best architects, not the cheapest ones.” — This closing sentence lists three qualifications joined with "and" and "but", stating the position directly and plainly. A 7.0 answer would more likely vary the connectors across this list instead of repeating the same pattern.
   • LR“it looks like a mistake that will stay there for a hundred years” — This is a plain, literal way of expressing permanence ("stay there for a hundred years") rather than a more vivid or idiomatic phrase for the same idea.
   • GRA“Historical centres are places where people still live, so if we stop all building, they become like museums where nobody can afford to live.” — This sentence uses a simple "so if...then" cause-and-result chain, accurate but built from basic clauses rather than a more compressed structure.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer opens with the balanced fragment "New buildings, yes; any building, no" and closes with the sharper contrast "The problem isn't newness; it's carelessness", giving the argument more shape than the plainer 6.5 version.

   New buildings, yes; any building, no, I'd say. A glass hotel went up a few years back within sight of Hue's old citadel walls, and it looks like a mistake that'll last a century — after which the city brought in stricter rules that really should have existed first. Historic centres are living places, and honestly, freezing them turns them into museums where nobody can actually afford to live. So construction should continue, but with limits on height, materials and scale that respect what's already there, and with the best architects rather than the cheapest. The problem isn't newness; it's carelessness.

   Why this band

   • FC“New buildings, yes; any building, no, I'd say.” — This semicolon-linked fragment states the position in a balanced, economical way before the hedge "I'd say", a more natural spoken rhythm than the full opening sentence of a 6.5 answer.
   • LR“freezing them turns them into museums where nobody can actually afford to live” — "Freezing them" is a more vivid, figurative verb choice than the plain "if we stop all building" a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“The problem isn't newness; it's carelessness.” — This closing sentence uses a semicolon to join two short parallel clauses, a compact contrastive structure beyond the fuller "but"-joined sentence a 6.5 answer would end on.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer sharpens the timeframe with "will outlast most of the people alive when it was approved" and closes with the past-tense echo "was never newness; it was always carelessness" for extra emphasis.

   New buildings, yes; any building, no. A glass hotel went up a few years ago within sight of Hue's old citadel walls, and it looks like a mistake that will outlast most of the people alive when it was approved — after which the city passed stricter rules that should have existed first. Historic centres are living places, and freezing them turns them into museums nobody can afford to live in. So construction should carry on, but under limits on height, materials and scale that actually respect what's already there, built by the best architects rather than the cheapest. Some cities manage this well, letting the old and new sit together comfortably. The problem was never newness; it was always carelessness.

   Why this band

   • FC“The problem was never newness; it was always carelessness.” — Shifting the closing contrast into the past tense ("was never... it was always") adds a small rhetorical emphasis beyond the present-tense version a 7.0 answer uses for the same idea.
   • LR“a mistake that will outlast most of the people alive when it was approved” — This is a vivid, precise way of expressing extreme permanence, more distinctive than the plainer "a mistake that'll last a century" a 7.0 answer would write.
   • GRA“Some cities manage this well, letting the old and new sit together comfortably” — A main clause is followed by a participial phrase ("letting the old and new sit together comfortably") rather than a second finite clause, a more compact grammatical choice than lower bands would make.

8. 8. Is it better to extend an existing city or build a new one?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer states a clear preference ("extending... usually works better"), gives one plain example, and explains the reason in a simple because-clause.

   Extending an existing city usually works better, I think, because cities grow naturally instead of being planned all at once. A new planned city outside Hanoi stood almost empty for years, with wide roads and no shops, while the old city kept growing around it. This is because people go where other people and jobs already are. Extending a city uses roads, water and culture that already exist, and can happen slowly. New cities can make sense sometimes, like easing pressure on a crowded capital. But they need a lot of time and patience to feel alive.

   Why this band

   • FC“This is because people go where other people and jobs already are.” — This short sentence restates the reason plainly as its own sentence rather than folding it into the example before it. A 7.0 answer would more likely link this reason directly onto the previous sentence with a dash.
   • LR“cities grow naturally instead of being planned all at once” — This is a plain, direct contrast ("naturally" vs. "planned") without any distinctive vocabulary or imagery.
   • GRA“A new planned city outside Hanoi stood almost empty for years, with wide roads and no shops, while the old city kept growing around it.” — This sentence uses a "while"-clause to contrast two situations, accurate and reasonably fluent but not particularly compressed or varied in structure.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer uses the compact contrast "grown rather than declared" and the dash to link the example directly to its lesson, adding more shape than the 6.5 answer's separate reason sentence.

   Extending usually works better, I think, because cities are grown rather than declared. A planned new city outside Hanoi stood half-empty for years, with wide roads and no shops, while the old city simply kept growing around it — people go, after all, where other people and jobs already are. Extending an existing city uses infrastructure, culture and momentum that already exist, and it can be done gradually. New cities do make sense in particular cases, like relieving a capital that's become impossible, or building near a new industry. But they need decades and a lot of patience to feel alive, and most governments lack both.

   Why this band

   • FC“cities are grown rather than declared” — This "X rather than Y" contrast is a compact, natural way of stating the idea, more fluent than the plain "grow naturally instead of being planned all at once" a 6.5 answer would write.
   • LR“Extending an existing city uses infrastructure, culture and momentum that already exist” — "Momentum" is a more precise, slightly figurative noun choice than the plain list a 6.5 answer would give, such as "roads, water and culture".
   • GRA“people go, after all, where other people and jobs already are” — The discourse marker "after all" is inserted mid-clause, a natural spoken interruption that a 6.5 answer's separate "This is because" sentence would not attempt.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer drops the verb in "wide roads and no shops" for compression, uses the precise verb "anchoring", and closes with the deliberate near-repetition "I'd extend outward... not just outward in general" as a pointed final distinction.

   Extending usually works better, because cities are grown rather than declared. A planned new city outside Hanoi stood half-empty for years, wide roads and no shops, while the old city simply kept growing around it — people go, in the end, where other people and jobs already are. Extending an existing city draws on infrastructure, culture and momentum already in place, and it can happen gradually rather than all at once. New cities do make sense in particular cases: relieving a capital that has become unworkable, or anchoring a new industry. But they need decades and enormous patience to feel alive, and most governments possess neither. I'd extend well before I built new, and I'd extend outward along transport lines, not just outward in general.

   Why this band

   • FC“I'd extend well before I built new, and I'd extend outward along transport lines, not just outward in general” — This closing sentence deliberately repeats "extend outward" to draw a fine distinction, an idiomatic rhetorical device beyond the plain summarising sentence a 6.5 answer would end on.
   • LR“relieving a capital that has become unworkable, or anchoring a new industry” — "Anchoring" is a precise, figurative verb choice in place of the plainer "building near a new industry" a 7.0 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“A planned new city outside Hanoi stood half-empty for years, wide roads and no shops, while the old city simply kept growing around it” — The verb is dropped from "wide roads and no shops", turning it into a compressed appositive fragment rather than a full "with"-phrase, a more economical construction than the fuller phrasing of lower bands.

9. 9. Why might it be important to consult local residents when planning new developments in a city?

   Sep–Dec 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   The 6.5 answer states the main reason directly ("residents know things that planners cannot see") and supports it with one clear example, using simple connectors like "because" throughout.

   Because residents know things planners cannot see from a drawing. A new park near my flat had a big, open lawn nobody uses, because in Da Nang's heat, people needed shade, seating and space for food stalls. The neighbours could have said all of this in five minutes if anyone had asked them. Consultation brings out practical knowledge, like where water collects or children cross the road. It also makes people care more about a place, because they helped to plan it. It can be slow, and the loudest voices can take over, so it needs to be managed carefully.

   Why this band

   • FC“The neighbours could have said all of this in five minutes if anyone had asked them.” — This sentence uses a plain conditional ("could have said... if anyone had asked") stated directly and separately from the example before it. A 7.5 answer would more likely compress this into the same sentence as the example.
   • LR“It also makes people care more about a place, because they helped to plan it.” — "Makes people care more" is a plain, general phrase rather than a more specific term like "ownership" for the same idea.
   • GRA“It can be slow, and the loudest voices can take over, so it needs to be managed carefully.” — This sentence chains three short clauses with "and" and "so", accurate but structurally simple compared to higher bands.

   Band 7.0

   The 7.0 answer folds the example and its lesson into one sentence with a dash ("all of which the neighbours would have said...") and introduces the more precise term "ownership", giving the argument more cohesion than the 6.5 list.

   Because residents know things planners just can't see from a drawing, honestly. A new park near my flat was designed with a beautiful open lawn nobody uses, since what people in Da Nang's heat actually needed was shade, seating and somewhere for the evening food stalls — all of which the neighbours would have said in five minutes if anyone had asked. Consultation surfaces practical knowledge: where the water collects, where children cross, which corner feels unsafe at night. It also builds a sense of ownership, since people look after a place they helped shape. It does slow things down and can be dominated by the loudest voices, so it needs managing.

   Why this band

   • FC“Because residents know things planners just can't see from a drawing, honestly.” — The spoken connector "honestly" at the end of the opening sentence adds a natural conversational emphasis a 6.5 answer's plain opening would not include.
   • LR“It also builds a sense of ownership, since people look after a place they helped shape” — "A sense of ownership" is a more precise, abstract noun phrase than the plain "makes people care more" a 6.5 answer would use for the same idea.
   • GRA“a beautiful open lawn nobody uses, since what people in Da Nang's heat actually needed was shade, seating and somewhere for the evening food stalls — all of which the neighbours would have said in five minutes if anyone had asked” — The dash introduces a which-clause referring back to the whole preceding idea, a moderately complex structure linking example and lesson in one sentence rather than the two separate sentences a 6.5 answer would use.

   Band 7.5

   The 7.5 answer uses the inverted conditional "had anyone thought to ask" instead of a plain if-clause and closes with the neatly parallel aphorism "a development nobody asked for tends to become a development nobody uses".

   Because residents know things planners can't see from a drawing. A new park near my flat was designed around a beautiful open lawn that nobody uses, since what people actually needed in Da Nang's heat was shade, seating and somewhere for the evening food stalls — all of which the neighbours would have said in five minutes, had anyone thought to ask. Consultation surfaces exactly this kind of practical knowledge: where the water collects, where children cross, which corner feels unsafe after dark. It also builds acceptance, since people tend to look after a place they helped shape and resist one simply imposed on them. It slows things down and can be hijacked by the loudest voices, so it needs careful managing. But a development nobody asked for tends to become a development nobody uses.

   Why this band

   • FC“But a development nobody asked for tends to become a development nobody uses.” — This closing sentence uses a tight, parallel repetition ("nobody asked for... nobody uses") as a memorable final line, a more polished rhetorical device than the plain summarising sentence a 6.5 answer ends on.
   • LR“It also builds acceptance, since people tend to look after a place they helped shape and resist one simply imposed on them” — "Imposed on them" is a precise, slightly formal verb choice contrasting with "helped shape", more distinctive than the plainer "makes people care more" a 6.5 answer would use.
   • GRA“all of which the neighbours would have said in five minutes, had anyone thought to ask” — The inverted conditional "had anyone thought to ask" replaces the more ordinary "if anyone had asked", a more literary, compressed construction than the standard conditional lower bands would use.