Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-28

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 6.5)

It is often argued that recycling is the only option to protect environment, whereas others contend that recycling alone cannot solve this issue. While both perspectives carry valid points, i personally lean towards the view that in addition to recycling, some other measures must be taken to tackle this growing concern about environment.

On the one hand, proponents of recycling argue that recycling is stopping climate from changing. Due to the realease of some harmful gases, plastics and other materials to the environment, climate is changing rapidly. Recycling hampers the distribution of these materials to environment because wastage are not thrown to rivers, ponds, or in a jungle. Rather, these are being recycled. For instance, Australia does heavy recycle process regularly, and the environment is really good there. Furthermore, another compelling reason supporting this idea is that recycling helps us to save natual resources. Resources like coal, gas and steel are limited. The more these are being used from soil, the more harm it causes to the climate by burning these simaltaneously.

On the other hand, opponents assert that consuming less offers great value. One significant argument is that less consuming creates less wastages, and less wastages create less environment pollution. If we use less amount of goods in our daily life, we do not need to rely heavily on recycling only. For instance, using less plastics in packaging makes less plastic waste which can contribute less to hamper the environment. From my perspective, this viewpoint is more convincing because this is a precaution rather than a solution after creating a mess.

Although there are legitimate arguments on both sides regarding recycling. I firmly believe that consuming less can play a significant role to save our environment. Moving forward, striking a balance between recycling and consuming less could yield the most favorable outcomes.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You address both views and state a clear preference for reducing consumption, especially when you call it “a precaution rather than a solution after creating a mess.” The discussion of recycling saving resources and reducing waste is relevant, and the final suggestion to combine both approaches adds a useful qualification. However, some points are asserted rather than fully explained: the claim that recycling is “stopping climate from changing” is too absolute, and the Australia example (“the environment is really good there”) does not show how recycling produces that outcome. The argument for consuming less is clearer, but could be developed with a specific example and a fuller explanation of its effects. This covers the task well, while some ideas still need more precise support.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a conclusion that restates your position. Signposting such as “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “From my perspective” helps readers follow the argument, and the ideas generally progress logically. Some linking is a little mechanical, however, and the final paragraph begins “Although there are legitimate arguments on both sides regarding recycling” without completing the contrast clearly before moving to your opinion. References such as “these” in “Rather, these are being recycled” are also not fully precise. To strengthen cohesion, connect each example explicitly to the claim it supports and use a wider variety of transitions and referencing.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “harmful gases,” “natural resources,” “packaging,” and “precaution,” and the meaning is generally clear. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “proponents” and “compelling reason.” However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural: “recycling is stopping climate from changing,” “heavy recycle process,” “less consuming,” and “less wastages.” Spelling errors such as “realease,” “natual,” and “simaltaneously” also reduce accuracy. Aim for precise environmental terms and check word forms and collocations; this would make your argument sound more natural and controlled without changing its meaning.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including a concession in “While both perspectives carry valid points” and a conditional structure in “If we use less amount of goods…” Meaning is usually understandable, and the response is not limited to short, simple sentences. Some grammatical errors remain, though. For example, “protect environment” needs an article, “wastage are not thrown” has subject–verb disagreement, and “Although there are legitimate arguments…” is a dependent clause presented as a complete sentence. There are also issues with articles and number in “use less amount of goods.” Review sentence boundaries, agreement, and article use, then proofread complex sentences to ensure each clause is complete.

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.