Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-27

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 6.5)

It is often claimed that not enough waste is recycled from the homes but people believe recycling can be increased if the government will make it a legal requirement. I partially agree with this view because obligatory rules by the legal departments can motivate individuals to considerably dispose their daily waste and improve the production of recycled products, whereas personal efforts should also be made to increase the process of recycling.

On the one hand, laws are extremely essential for the recycling of the waste. This is because an increasing number of people are disposing their waste without considering the importance of their capability to get recycled. Many people dispose bottles, cans and other items in the bins, which can otherwise be used for the production of several useful products such as clothes, bags and boxes. Therefore, governments should make an effort and make recycling compulsory among households, which can motivate them to discard the products appropriately while keeping the rules in mind. For instance, if the government put fine on people who are not recycling their waste, they may become obliged to follow this rule. Furthermore, governments should create recycling centres which can facilitate people to dispose their waste in these centres and as a result increased the production of recycled products.

On the other hand, a legal requirement alone is insufficient for the increased recycling. People can also improve this recycling process by discarding their waste adequately in seperate recycling bins, which are used specifically for the recycled products. This combined effort from the legal organisations and people may help improve recycling of waste more efficiently. Therefore, I believe laws alone are insufficient for the people to recycle more, personal efforts should be made equally.

In conclusion, although laws can have a greater impact on the increased process of recycling which may prevent people from discarding their waste randomly, personal efforts are equally important for this recycling process. Therefore, combined efforts can improve the production of recycled products.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear: you partly agree that laws can increase recycling, while arguing that individual action is also necessary. You address both sides and give relevant examples, including fines for households and the provision of recycling centres. These points support the main argument, but some are not fully explained: for example, you mention that recycling centres could increase production of recycled goods without showing how access or convenience would change household behaviour. The discussion of personal responsibility is also brief and largely repeats the idea of using separate bins. To strengthen the response, develop the reasons behind each claim and make the extent of your agreement more explicit in the conclusion, rather than mainly restating the combined-effort position.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction states your position, two body paragraphs present contrasting considerations, and the conclusion summarises your view. The progression from government action to individual responsibility is easy to follow, and signposts such as “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” help orient the reader. Some linking is nevertheless mechanical, particularly the repeated use of “Therefore” and “This is because.” The final sentences of the second body paragraph and conclusion also repeat the idea that both laws and personal efforts are needed. Use a wider range of links that show the precise relationship between ideas, and avoid restating the same conclusion in several places.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “legal requirement,” “recycling centres,” “compulsory,” and “recycled products,” so the main ideas are communicated clearly. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “obligatory rules” and “facilitate.” However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural: “dispose their waste,” “the importance of their capability to get recycled,” and “increased the production” do not express the intended meanings smoothly. “Recycling” and “waste” are also repeated frequently. Build precision by learning common collocations such as “dispose of waste,” “recyclable materials,” and “increase recycling rates,” and check spelling, as in “separate” rather than “seperate.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including clauses introduced by “because,” “which,” and “although.” Most sentences remain understandable, and the argument is not obscured by grammatical errors. Some errors in sentence construction and verb forms persist, however. In “if the government will make it a legal requirement,” the conditional would be more accurate as “if the government makes it a legal requirement.” The sentence beginning “Therefore, I believe laws alone are insufficient…” joins two independent clauses with a comma; use a full stop or a conjunction. There are also article and plural-pattern issues, such as “put fine” instead of “impose a fine.” Review conditionals, clause boundaries, and article use to improve accuracy while retaining your complex structures.

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.