The cue card
Describe a historical place that you have visited.
You should say:
- what this place is
- where it is
- what you saw and did there
and explain how you felt about visiting this place.
You have one minute to make notes, then speak for one to two minutes.
Band 8–9 sample answer
Written by Abroadway as a model of natural, high-band speaking (not an official IELTS sample).
The historical place that left the biggest impression on me is Fatehpur Sikri, a ruined Mughal city that I visited about two years ago on a family trip to India. It's in the state of Uttar Pradesh, roughly an hour's drive from Agra, so a lot of tourists combine it with a visit to the Taj Mahal, which is exactly what we did. According to our guide, it was built in the late sixteenth century by the Emperor Akbar as his new capital, but it was abandoned not long after it was completed, possibly because of problems with the water supply. What struck me straight away was how well preserved it is in spite of that.
The whole complex is built from red sandstone, so in the late afternoon sun the buildings almost seem to glow. We spent about four hours wandering around. The first thing we saw was an enormous gateway at the top of a long flight of steps, and I remember feeling slightly dizzy just looking up at it. Inside, there were courtyards, palaces and a beautiful white marble tomb, where lots of visitors were tying threads onto the carved stone screens to make wishes.
We were also shown a hall where the emperor is said to have held discussions with scholars from different religions, which I found fascinating. My younger sister spent most of the time photographing the carvings, while I got rather carried away trying to imagine what daily life there might have been like. As for how I felt, it was a strange mixture of awe and melancholy. On the one hand, the architecture was breathtaking, and it made me appreciate how sophisticated Mughal builders were.
On the other, there was something quite sad about walking through an entire city that had been built with such ambition and then simply left empty. It made me realise how quickly even powerful empires can change direction.
Useful phrases from this answer
- left the biggest impression on me
- affected me most strongly
- what struck me straight away
- what I noticed immediately and found surprising
- well preserved
- kept in good condition for a long time
- got rather carried away
- became so excited or involved that I lost track of time
- a strange mixture of awe and melancholy
- a feeling of wonder and sadness at the same time
- a physical link to the past
- something real that connects us directly to history
- a middle path
- a compromise between two extremes
- recognise warning signs
- notice early signs that something bad may happen
Part 3 follow-up questions and answers
Do young people in your country show much interest in history?
I'd say their interest is fairly limited, at least in history as a school subject. Many students see it as a matter of memorising dates and names for exams, so they don't develop much curiosity about it. However, I think young Bangladeshis care a great deal about certain parts of their history, particularly the Language Movement of 1952 and the Liberation War of 1971, which are commemorated every year and form a big part of national identity. There's also growing interest online, where short videos about forgotten places or old photographs of Dhaka often attract a lot of attention, so the interest clearly exists when history is presented in an engaging way.
How can museums and historical sites attract more young visitors?
The most effective approach, in my view, is to make visits more interactive. Young people are used to engaging with content rather than just reading labels, so things like touchscreens, augmented reality reconstructions or tours led by enthusiastic young guides could make a huge difference. Museums could also use social media more creatively, for instance by sharing behind-the-scenes stories or short videos about individual objects. Hosting events such as evening openings, concerts or photography competitions might bring in people who wouldn't normally consider visiting. And basic things matter too: affordable tickets, clean facilities and a decent cafe can turn a visit into an enjoyable day out rather than a duty.
Why is it important to protect old buildings?
I think old buildings are important because they're a physical link to the past. They show how people lived, what they valued and what skills they had, in a way that textbooks can't really capture. They also give cities a distinctive character; without them, many places would look identical, full of glass towers and shopping malls. In Old Dhaka, for example, the narrow lanes and old merchants' houses tell the story of how the city developed over centuries. There's an economic argument too, since well-preserved historic areas tend to attract tourists. And once an old building is demolished, it's gone forever, so I'd argue it's always worth being cautious.
Who should pay to maintain historical sites, the government or the visitors?
I'd argue it should be a shared responsibility, but with the government taking the leading role. Historical sites belong to the whole nation, including future generations, so it makes sense for public money to fund their basic protection. Relying entirely on ticket sales would be risky, because less famous sites that attract few visitors might be neglected even if they're historically significant. That said, it seems fair for visitors to contribute through entrance fees, perhaps with higher prices for foreign tourists and discounts for students. Private sponsorship could also help, as long as companies aren't allowed to commercialise the sites in a way that damages their character.
Should old buildings in city centres be replaced with modern ones?
Not as a general rule, although I accept it's sometimes necessary. If an old building is structurally unsafe and can't realistically be repaired, or if it has no particular historical or architectural value, then replacing it with something modern and efficient can be perfectly reasonable, especially in crowded cities where space is precious. However, buildings with genuine historical significance should be protected, because they give a city its identity. In many cases there's also a middle path: restoring the outside of an old building while modernising the interior, so that it can be used as offices, shops or a cafe. That way, the city keeps its character without turning into a museum.
What can a country learn from studying its own history?
Quite a lot, I'd say. Most obviously, history helps a country avoid repeating its mistakes; by understanding what caused past conflicts, economic crises or injustices, people are in a better position to recognise warning signs in the present. History can also strengthen national identity and unity, since it reminds citizens of the struggles and sacrifices that shaped the country they live in. For a nation like Bangladesh, which was born out of a struggle for language and independence, that sense of shared memory is especially powerful. At the same time, studying history honestly means acknowledging uncomfortable episodes as well as glorious ones, which I think is a sign of a mature society.
Practise this cue card out loud
Free, no account needed. Use Chrome or Edge with a microphone; you'll get a band estimate for fluency, vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.
Want the technique behind a strong Part 2? Read the free Speaking lessons.