Government & SocietyOpinion (Agree / Disagree)
IELTS Essay: Public Services vs the Arts (Band 9 vs 6.5)
In short
Below is a full Band 9 model answer to this IELTS Writing Task 2 question, the same question written at Band 6.5, and a criterion-by-criterion breakdown of exactly what separates them — so you can see what to change in your own writing. Then check your essay with the free tool.
The question
Some people believe that governments should spend public money on essential services such as healthcare and education rather than on the arts. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
How to approach a Opinion (Agree / Disagree) question
For an agree/disagree question, decide your position before you write and make it unmistakable in the introduction. You can fully agree, fully disagree, or partially agree — all are fine — but you must then defend that single position consistently across both body paragraphs. The most common Task Response error here is sitting on the fence: giving arguments for both sides without ever committing to a view.
The plan
- 01Introduction: paraphrase the debate over funding services versus the arts and state a clear position - services must be protected, but the arts should not be defunded.
- 02Body 1: argue that a thriving arts sector delivers real economic returns (tourism, jobs, growth) that ultimately help fund public services.
- 03Body 2: argue the social and cultural value of the arts, conceding that healthcare takes precedence in an emergency but not permanently.
- 04Conclusion: restate that both deserve funding and a balanced government should not sacrifice one for the other.
Band 9 model answer
It is sometimes argued that public funds are better directed towards indispensable services like hospitals and schools than towards cultural pursuits. While I accept that essential services must never be compromised, I firmly disagree with the notion that the arts should be starved of state support.
The first reason concerns the substantial economic dividends that a thriving cultural sector generates. Museums, theatres and festivals draw millions of visitors each year, and this influx sustains hotels, restaurants and countless jobs that would otherwise vanish. London's West End, for instance, contributes billions to the national economy and employs a workforce far larger than most casual observers assume. To treat the arts as an expendable luxury, therefore, is to overlook a reliable engine of growth that ultimately helps fund the very services critics wish to protect.
A second consideration is the profound social good that culture delivers. Access to music, literature and the visual arts nurtures creativity, strengthens community identity and offers a vital outlet for people struggling with isolation or mental illness. Admittedly, when budgets are stretched during an emergency, healthcare must take precedence. Yet this is a matter of temporary prioritisation, not a justification for permanently abandoning the cultural life on which a healthy society depends.
In conclusion, although core services rightly command the lion's share of public spending, the arts are far too valuable, both economically and socially, to be dismissed as a dispensable extra. A far-sighted government would therefore fund both, recognising that a nation's health is measured not only by its hospitals but also by the richness of its cultural life.
The same question at Band 6.5
Nowadays many people believe that the government should spend the public money on important services such as health and education instead of the arts. In my opinion, I disagree with this idea, because in my view the arts is also very important for the society and we should not ignore it.
Firstly, it is true that services like hospital and school are very necessary for the people. Everyone need good health and a good education for their future life. So the government must give enough money for these things. Without hospitals people can become sick and cannot get treatment, and without schools children are not able to study and get a job later. This is the main reason why some people think that the arts is not so important and can be ignored.
Secondly, however, I think the arts is also important for many reasons. The arts can make people happy and help them to relax after a long and hard day at work. Also, arts such as music, cinema and painting can bring a lot of tourists to the country and this give more money to the economy. Many people from all around the world like to visit famous museums and theatres. In addition, the arts is a big part of our culture and history, so we should not forget about it for the next generation.
In conclusion, I think that the government should definitely spend money on the important services, but at the same time they should not forget about the arts. Both of them are very important for the people and also for the whole country. So in my opinion the best way is to give money for both things equally.
What separates them, criterion by criterion
| Criterion | Band 9 | Band 6.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Task Response | Takes a clear stance ('I firmly disagree') and develops both an economic and a social argument, while conceding that healthcare 'must take precedence' in an emergency. | Answers the question and reaches a position, but ideas such as the arts 'can make people happy' stay general and are not developed with specific support. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | Ideas progress through varied signposting ('The first reason concerns...', 'A second consideration is...') and clean referencing back to earlier points. | Relies on mechanical linkers ('Firstly', 'Secondly', 'Also', 'In addition') and lists points rather than connecting them logically. |
| Lexical Resource | Uses precise collocation such as 'economic dividends', 'a thriving cultural sector' and 'command the lion's share of public spending'. | Repeats high-frequency words such as 'important', 'money' and 'things' throughout the essay. |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | Controls a wide range of complex structures, e.g. 'To treat the arts as an expendable luxury... is to overlook a reliable engine of growth'. | Uses mostly simple sentences with recurring slips such as 'the arts is', 'Everyone need' and 'this give more money'. |
Examiner's note
The Band 9 answer wins on every criterion: it argues a clear, qualified position with fully developed reasons, moves between ideas through natural cohesion, and deploys precise, varied language almost flawlessly. The Band 6.5 response is relevant and easy to understand, but its ideas stay general, its linking is mechanical, and repeated subject-verb errors ('the arts is', 'Everyone need') keep it from a higher band.
Vocabulary from the Band 9 answer
| Word / phrase | Meaning |
|---|---|
| indispensable services | services that are absolutely essential and cannot be done without |
| starved of state support | deprived of government funding |
| economic dividends | financial benefits or returns produced by something |
| a thriving cultural sector | a flourishing, successful arts industry |
| an expendable luxury | a non-essential thing that can be cut without serious harm |
| a reliable engine of growth | a dependable source of economic expansion |
| take precedence | be treated as more important than something else |
| command the lion's share | receive the largest part of something |
Frequently asked questions
How do I take a position in an agree/disagree essay?
State your view clearly in the introduction and keep it consistent to the end. You can fully agree, fully disagree, or partly agree, but the reader must never be in any doubt about where you stand.
How many words should a Task 2 essay be?
Write at least 250 words. There is no official upper limit, but most high-scoring answers fall between 260 and 300 words; padding much beyond that risks repetition and more errors.
Is it acceptable to concede a point to the other side?
Yes. Acknowledging a counter-argument and then explaining why your view still holds shows maturity and strengthens Task Response, as long as your overall position remains clear.