Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-10-16
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 6.0)
In many countries of the world, citizens do not recycle their trash as much as they should. I think this is because of the lack of knowledge on how much trashing is affecting the environment and causing global harm.
Most people tend to throw away trash because the recycling facilities are not available where they live. So in order to put away their rabish using a green approach they need to travel far from their houses. Also a lot of people are ignorant on how to use the different recycling bins as there is little to no instructions provided by the government, Especially old people that are not familiar with the steps, tend to get confused. For example in my country it's very rare to find recycling bins or centers, all of the trash is put in the same bin. This results in citizens normalizing trashing and not willing to make any action to follow green options.
Another reason is the lack of knowledge on the dangers of pollution on the environment. A lot of people in different places of the world still do not understand the effects of global warming and other different environmental crisis because they never been taught about it, and the government never put any remarkable attention on the subject. For exemple, a lot of developing countries do not teach environmental issues in schools nor advertise it in the media, so people never know the real cause of their wild fires and why the sea level is rising.
Although its an important problem there are a lot of different solutions to fix it, governments needs to raise awareness on the ecological problems we are facing to educate people on the importance of recycling and create laws that criminalize littering. Also people need to be responsible and wise on how to protect their environment, because it's starts with them.
In conclusion, people and governments are responsible for the causes of the issues in nature, so they need to work together to solve these problems.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 6.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5
You address both parts of the question and maintain a clear view that limited facilities and public awareness contribute to low recycling. The examples about bins being unavailable in your country and environmental issues not being taught in some developing countries make the causes relevant and concrete. Your proposed actions—public education and laws against littering—are appropriate, but the solutions are less fully explained than the causes. For instance, explain how awareness campaigns would reach people, or how governments could make recycling easier by providing accessible, clearly labelled bins. The conclusion restates shared responsibility but could more directly summarise the specific measures. The response already shows a clear, relevant answer; fuller development of the solutions and their likely effects would strengthen it further.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0
The response has a coherent overall structure: an introduction, two paragraphs explaining causes, a paragraph proposing solutions, and a conclusion. Paragraphs generally have clear central purposes, and signposts such as “Another reason” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the progression. However, some connections are mechanical or unclear. The opening says lack of knowledge is the cause, while the first body paragraph focuses mainly on facilities, so the relationship between the ideas could be signalled more clearly. Within the solutions paragraph, awareness, laws, and individual responsibility are placed together without explaining how they connect. Use clearer referencing and transitions, and organise each paragraph around one main point with supporting explanation, to make the progression more consistently smooth.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.5
You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “recycling facilities,” “global warming,” “environmental issues,” and “sea level,” which helps communicate the subject. There are also attempts at more specific expressions such as “raise awareness” and “criminalize littering.” However, several word choices, collocations, and spelling errors reduce precision: “trashing” is not natural for disposing of rubbish, “rabish” and “exemple” are misspelled, and “ecological problems” is less precise than the context requires. Repetition of “trash” and “people” also limits range. Aim for accurate, natural combinations such as “dispose of waste,” “recycling centres,” and “environmental impacts.” This would make your vocabulary more flexible and precise while preserving your clear meaning.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5
You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including cause-and-effect structures such as “This results in citizens…” and a subordinate clause beginning “because they never been taught about it.” Most ideas remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. For example, “the government never put” needs a suitable tense or auxiliary, “governments needs” has a subject–verb agreement error, and “it’s starts” should use the possessive pronoun “its” with the correct verb form. There are also issues with articles and sentence punctuation, including the comma splice in “Although its an important problem there are…”. Review agreement, verb forms, and sentence boundaries, and proofread punctuation. More accurate control of these structures would improve clarity.
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.