Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-09-18

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.

To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

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

Student answer (Band 6.0)

Some people beleive that too little household waste is recycled and that the only way to improve recycling rates for the governments to make it compulsory.Nowadays recycling household waste has become an important environmental issues. Some people argue that governement should make recycling a legal requirements becuase people do ot recycle enough.

On the one hand , government regulations can be an effective way to increase recycling rates. If households are legally required to separate recycalable materials people are more likely to develop this habit. Governements can also introduces fines for those who repeatedly ignore rules. For an example, some cities provide separate bins for paper , plastic, and food waste and impose penalties when waste is not properly separated.Such as measures can reduce the account of rubbish sent to landfills and encourage more responisble bhaviour.

On the other hand,laws may not sole the problem alone. People need to understand why recycling is important and how it benefits the environment. Schools, social media and public campaigns can educate the citizens about issues uch as pollution and unnecesary use of natural resurces.In addition governments should recycling convienent by providing enough collection points and separate bins. If recycling facilities are difficult to access, even people who want to recycle may find it inconvenient.

In my opinion a combination of laws and education of facilities or convienents it would be most practical approch. I agree that laws can plan an important role in increasing husehold recycling but they should not be considered the onl solution.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing the extent to which laws are needed for household recycling. A clear position is presented in the introduction and reinforced in the conclusion. Main ideas are supported with relevant arguments regarding government regulations, fines, and public education. For instance, the writer notes that 'governments can also introduces fines for those who repeatedly ignore rules' and suggests that combining laws with education is the most practical approach. However, some ideas are slightly under-developed, and there are occasional generalisations. Overall, the response meets the requirements for a Band 6.0 as it covers the prompt adequately while maintaining a consistent viewpoint throughout the essay.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear paragraph structure. Each paragraph has a distinct focus, moving from an introduction to body paragraphs presenting contrasting views, and finally a conclusion. Cohesive devices are employed to connect ideas, such as 'On the one hand' and 'On the other hand', which helps guide the reader through the discussion. However, referencing and cohesion are sometimes faulty or mechanical, as seen in minor awkward transitions and occasional punctuation issues around conjunctions (e.g., 'On the one hand , government regulations'). Paragraphing is used appropriately, but overall progression occasionally feels slightly disjointed due to minor mechanical errors in linking ideas. This aligns well with the descriptors for Band 6.0.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully incorporating topic-specific terms such as 'household waste', 'landfills', 'recyclable materials', and 'pollution'. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary, such as 'compulsory' and 'penalties', showing some ambition. However, there are noticeable spelling and word-choice errors throughout the text, including 'beleive' instead of 'believe', 'governement' instead of 'government', 'recycalable' instead of 'recyclable', 'bhaviour' instead of 'behaviour', 'uch' instead of 'such', 'resurces' instead of 'resources', 'convienent' instead of 'convenient', and 'approch' instead of 'approach'. Despite these recurring errors, the vocabulary is minimally adequate and meaning is rarely impeded. These characteristics fit the Band 5.5 descriptor.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The response exhibits a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, attempting conditional clauses (e.g., 'If households are legally required... people are more likely to...'). However, grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. There are several noticeable errors, such as subject-verb agreement issues ('the only way to improve recycling rates for the governments to make it compulsory', missing the verb 'is') and missing articles or prepositions ('education of facilities or convienents it would be most practical approch'). Punctuation errors are also present, including missing spaces before commas and periods. While these errors do not severely impede communication, they occur frequently enough to prevent the writing from reaching a higher band. Therefore, a score of 5.5 is appropriate for this criterion.

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.