Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-09-25
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Concern for the environment is growing and more and more people are choosing to recycle. But some people suggest that recycling is not enough. They believe we need to consume less.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.
Student answer (Band 5.0)
No boubts that serious threats are growing rapidly due to nature hazards activities and many peoples give their opinions that recycling are not eno ugh to counter these concerns. They want to use less harmful things.
In my prespective, recycling nature hazards matrieal is definately a good method to underground waste and harmful matrieal and also use this matrieal again. Because recycling method use all over the world. Many international companies have specified for underground harmful matrial and made various products for again useful purpose.
On the other way, some people prespective's that recycling is not enough for managing dangerous things.They said that we must use a limit amounts of things that we easily tackle this worst problem.Because we use less quantity of products and sources we easily managed this gobal threat.
But in my opinion, both of the prespectives have good approach towards environmental concerns, but we need to taking practical measure to solve this global problem in many ways, Means we growing more trees , planting millions of trees around the world, Secondly we limit the use of green house gases that the main remedy of problem. Moreover, the governments of the world caloborate and cooperate each other by sharing experiences, exchanging information toward environ
mental concerns. Social media and other international NGOs also make a practical framwork .
In conclusion, we have a number or practical ways to avoid this serious concerns. By runing public awareness campaigns and caloborate each other.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0
The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views on recycling and consumption, and presents a clear personal opinion. However, there are significant issues that pull down the score. First, the essay falls short of the minimum word count requirement, clocking in at 244 words instead of 250, which impacts task completion. Second, the development of ideas is somewhat limited and repetitive. For instance, the discussion on recycling mentions underground waste and global companies, but lacks depth and specific examples. The arguments presented in body paragraphs remain underdeveloped, and the conclusion introduces new solutions rather than summarizing the main points. Consequently, the task is addressed only partially, fitting the band 5 descriptors.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The essay has some basic organization with paragraph breaks, but it lacks clear overall progression and logical flow. While transitional markers like 'In my prespective', 'On the other way', and 'In conclusion' are attempted, they are often misused mechanically or incorrectly. For example, 'On the other way' is non-standard English. Referencing is frequently unclear, and sentences within paragraphs do not always connect smoothly. Paragraphing is attempted, but the final paragraph is fragmented and repetitive. There is a lack of skillful cohesive devices, making the progression of ideas disjointed and placing the response squarely at band 4.5, rounded to 5.0 for some recognizable structure.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is basic and repetitive, with numerous spelling and word-choice errors that severely restrict precision. Examples include 'boubts' for doubts, 'matrieal' for material, 'definately', 'prespective's', 'gobal' for global, 'caloborate' for collaborate, and 'framwork'. The writer attempts less common items like 'environmental concerns' and 'international NGOs', but these are undermined by persistent spelling mistakes ('matrieal', 'caloborate') and awkward collocations ('nature hazards activities', 'limit amounts of things'). Communication is strained in places due to these lexical inaccuracies, aligning the response with band 4.5, rounded to 5.0.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
Grammatical control is weak throughout the response. There is a very limited range of structures, and attempts at complex sentences are frequently faulty. For example, 'Because we use less quantity of products and sources we easily managed this gobal threat' lacks proper subordination and tense consistency. There are frequent errors in subject-verb agreement and word forms, such as 'recycling are not enough' and 'we need to taking practical measure'. Punctuation is also erratic, with missing commas and incorrect capitalization. These frequent errors cause difficulty for the reader and reflect band 4.5 to 5.0 characteristics.
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.