Some cities create housing for their growing population by providing taller buildings. Other cities create housing by building on wider areas of land.
Which solution is better?
The increasing population results in the greater need of buildings in cities. Some cities expand their housing vertically, which means they build higher houses. Others widen their lands for the purpose of creating housing. From my point of view, both of these measures are great.
Taller buildings mean more and more lands saved. Therefore, people can build a larger number of buildings, which are used for various purposes such as recreational centers, shopping malls or private ownerships. However, each floor of this type of buildings is not very spacious. For example, a lot of blocks of apartments in Hanoi is limited by space and is considered suitable for a couple rather than a family.
Unlike the former solution, expanding the areas of land allows people to have more space to design their own creative properties. For instance, people live in the flats can only have a humble garden in the balcony while the owners of private houses can own a large-sized garden with various types of plants. However, this method of creating house has disadvantages that fewer people can possess an ownership because it requires a greater use of land.
In conclusion, creating taller buildings and widening the areas of land have pros and cons as mentioned above.
After reviewing, I can see I make a lot of errors and may not meet the first scoring criterion which is task response. But I still want to keep it as raw as possible so that I could see where I am. I'm dying for your comments and your scoring. Thank you so much.
I am not sure how scoring works in IELTS, but overall in my opinion, this essay is descent. I will try to provide more detailed examples of cities to compare taller buildings and building on wider areas.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 11,705 3785
You have bigger problems than your TA failure. The essay will never pass because, you not only failed to properly address the prompt, but you also failed to write the minimum number of words. You have to write at least 250 words to get the minimum passing consideration within the scoring meters for each section. In this case, you will receive a percentage deduction for the TA score based on the missing 42 words. Add up the word count situation and the improper task response and your essay will begin at such a low TA mark, there is absolutely no way you can get even close to a passing score.
Then there is the problem of the conclusion. You need to write at least 40 words, composed of at least 2 sentence for this section. That means 20 words per sentence at a minimum. Failure to present the proper format will also result in additional TA penalties in this section. You failed to show a proper reverse paraphrase of the given discussion. Anyway, all of these observations are moot since you failed immediately in the first paragraph anyway, which led to failing discussion paragraphs, and so on and so forth. You get the picture. You admitted having observed the errors yourself.
1. " From my point of view, both of ...". I think you should use this instead : " From my point of view, each measure has its own benefits and drawbacks which will be discussed in this essay."
2. The conclusion is quite short and general.
" In conclusion, there are many ways to create accommodation for city residents. Whether by constructing higher houses or by finding a spacious area, there should be both pros and cons that worth considering. Choosing which way to build house should depend on the city's situation and the demand of its residents."
Above are just my own objective opinions. Thank you for reading!