TOEFL iBT (Writing for Academic Discussion)2026

Your professor is teaching a class on urban planning. Write a post responding to the professor's question. In your response you should express and support your opinion and make a contribution to the discussion in your own words. Professor: "Many growing cities face a difficult trade-off between building more housing and preserving green public spaces such as parks. If you had to choose, should cities prioritise affordable housing or the protection of parks and green areas? Why?"

- Time pressure: 10 minutes total. Aim for roughly 120 well-chosen words rather than padding to a target length. - Vocabulary should be accurate and natural rather than fancy. Showy words used incorrectly cost more than they earn. - Address the professor's question directly and engage with at least one classmate-style angle (housing cost, public health, density). - The Power column upgrades word choice without changing meaning or grammar structure.

Urban planning — should cities prioritise parks or housing?

The boring draft

Score: 3 / 5

I think cities should prioritise affordable housing, though I see why Hassan worries about losing green space. Rents in major cities have gone up far faster than wages, and families forced into long commutes end up hurting their health and family time anyway. That said, the choice is not one or the other. Dense, mid-rise housing built around existing parks — rather than sprawl that eats farmland — can make both goals at once. To Mei's point about heat and air quality, I would make rooftop gardens and small "pocket parks" inside every new development. The real problem is suburban sprawl, not apartments next to parks. A city that builds upward, with green corridors woven between, gives both housing affordability and outdoor access — there is no good reason to treat them as opposites.

The power upgrade

Score: 5 / 5

I maintain cities should prioritise affordable housing, though I see why Hassan worries about sacrificing green space. Rents in major cities have surged far faster than wages, and families forced into long commutes end up harming their health and family time anyway. That said, the choice is not binary. Dense, mid-rise housing built around existing parks — rather than sprawl that consumes farmland — can deliver both goals at once. To Mei's point about heat and air quality, I would require rooftop gardens and small "pocket parks" inside every new development. The real culprit is suburban sprawl, not apartments next to parks. A city that builds upward, with green corridors woven between, delivers both housing affordability and outdoor access — there is no good reason to treat them as mutually exclusive.