Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-10-08

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In many countries, people do not recycle their rubbish as much as they could.

Why do you think this is? What can be done to change this?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Majority of countries in Asia except Southeast asia do not recycle their trash or rubbish at all. Countries like India, Pakistan, Iran, Bangladesh do not have any proper systems to disintegrate the rubbish let alone recycling. Meanwhile in countries like Japan or South Korea, recycling is encouraged. In Germany you get 25 cents if you recycle a plastic bottle or a can, this encourages people to recycle plastic and they get a reward also for doing it.

These type of activites are implemented when proper policies are made for plastic recycling by the government. Many of first world countries have enforced the policies first for not encouraging the use of plastic bags and recycling cans and everything else then people took part in these activities for rewards. Creating a sense of responsibilty is also essential in this matter, but a minor reward for recycling plays a much important part in it.

Separate dustbins should be made for each kind of rubbish, this helps recycling everyday waste much easier rather than first separating useful waste from useless.

Some active policies should be made for recycling of materials and enforcing a little fine or penalty for those industries for throw their wastes outside rather than first disintegrating it. Third world countries should enforce such laws strictly for better waste management. Lastly I want to conclude this by saying better laws make people aware more of their responsibilites and the regulations to abide by. Great people make the country great when they play their individual parts in it.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You address both questions by identifying weak recycling systems and limited incentives as reasons, then suggesting rewards, separate bins, public responsibility, and penalties for industries. The Germany bottle-deposit example is relevant and helps illustrate how incentives might work. However, the explanation of why recycling is low is brief and largely asserted: the opening lists countries and says they lack systems, but does not explain other barriers, such as limited collection services or public awareness. Some proposed measures also need clearer development—for example, explain how separate bins would be collected and processed, or how penalties would be enforced. The conclusion repeats the importance of laws and individual responsibility rather than drawing together the main causes and solutions.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable overall structure: it introduces differences between countries, discusses policies and incentives, and then presents practical measures before concluding. Linking expressions such as “Meanwhile,” “also,” and “Lastly” help signal relationships between points. However, progression is not consistently clear. The first paragraph combines country comparisons with the German reward example, while the next moves between government policy, public responsibility, and rewards without clearly separating these ideas. The final two paragraphs also overlap in their focus on regulation. Some connections are mechanical, and references such as “These type of activities” are not fully clear. Grouping causes together and solutions together, with a distinct paragraph for each, would make the argument easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “recycle,” “policies,” “reward,” “separate dustbins,” “fine,” and “waste management,” so the main ideas are generally understandable. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “creating a sense of responsibility” and “regulations to abide by.” However, the range is limited by repeated use of “recycle,” “rubbish,” and “people,” and several choices are inaccurate or unnatural, including “disintegrate the rubbish,” “first world countries,” and “a much important part.” Spelling errors such as “activites,” “responsibilty,” and “responsibilites” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more precise environmental terms and check spelling and collocations when editing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more extended sentence forms, and most of the meaning can be followed. For example, the sentence about Germany links a deposit reward with its intended effect, while “Separate dustbins should be made…” uses a passive construction. However, errors occur in basic agreement, articles, and sentence structure. “These type of activities” should use a plural form, and “Many of first world countries” needs an article or a different construction. The clause “for those industries for throw their wastes” is grammatically incomplete, and the opening sentence lacks a clear article and punctuation around its broad claim. Some long sentences also join several ideas without clear boundaries. Practise accurate complex clauses and proofread agreement and sentence boundaries.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.