Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-28

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 argue that residents are not recycling enough from their own homes and that there is not enough place to recycle wastes. Other people think that the government should instead create a law to increase recycling in the community. Although it can be viewed as a benefit to some countries, I firmly believe that a law is not necessarily needed to encourage a community recycle more.

Arguably, people are not recycling enough due to lack of knowledge in proper recycling. In fact, in some countries, residents from poor economic standing who was not able to enter primary or secondary schools would not know how the process of recycling works. Therefore, they tend to limit the amount of what they recycle.

However, the governemnt should take part to assist uneducated citizens by organizing and implementing seminars to teach the community on what and how to recycle. For instance, public sectors should create trainings where they can demonstrate ways of recycling. In return, people will willingly recycle more wastes as they learn its benefits and usages.

Moreover, instead of creating laws to implement recycling to the community, the government should construct more factories where they collect wastes and people contributes by properly segregating biodegradable from non-biodegradable. For example, factories from other countries collects wastes from different residential areas and commercial buldings and then turn it into a reusable items that can be sold to the public. In effect, more citizens are encouraged to recycle as they learn that it can also be profitable.

In conclusion, although poor people tends to limit their recycling habits, I believe that the government should help them by increasing their knowledge on the process and benefits of recycling. I also firmly believe that a law is not necessary because they should be the one helping the community by building structures to help the community and its people.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the introduction: you believe laws are not necessary, and the conclusion restates this view. You address the question with relevant alternatives, especially public education and better recycling facilities, and support them with examples such as seminars and waste-processing factories. This gives the response a sound basis and covers the main task. However, the discussion focuses more on why people do not recycle and what governments could provide than on whether legal requirements themselves would increase recycling. The point about residents’ limited education is also general, and the factory example is not developed with a specific illustration. To strengthen the response, compare the likely effectiveness of education and infrastructure with enforcement, and explain when a law might or might not be useful.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay has a clear overall structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting alternatives to legislation, and a conclusion. Paragraphs generally have identifiable central ideas, and transitions such as “However,” “Moreover,” and “In conclusion” help signal the progression. This makes the argument easy to follow overall. Some connections are less precise, though: the opening mentions a lack of recycling space, but the first body paragraph shifts to lack of knowledge without clearly linking the two. The repeated references to “the government” and “the community” also make the flow somewhat mechanical, while “In return” does not clearly express the relationship between training and increased recycling. Use more precise referencing and make each paragraph’s link to the central question explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “recycling,” “segregating,” “biodegradable,” “non-biodegradable,” and “reusable,” which helps communicate the subject clearly. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “economic standing” and “implementing seminars.” However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, including “recycle wastes,” “create trainings,” and “recycle to the community.” Spelling errors such as “governemnt” and “buldings” also reduce accuracy. These issues do not prevent the reader from understanding your argument, but they limit precision and fluency. Aim for natural collocations and check spelling and word forms carefully; for example, use “recycle household waste” and “provide training.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a concession in “Although it can be viewed as a benefit…” and a conditional-style explanation beginning “as they learn its benefits.” Most sentences communicate their main meaning, but some grammatical errors recur. Subject–verb agreement is inconsistent in “residents … who was not able” and “people contributes,” while “factories … collects” also needs a plural verb. There are problems with articles and number in “turn it into a reusable items,” and the final sentence has an unclear structure in “they should be the one helping.” These errors are noticeable, though the overall message remains understandable. Review agreement, singular and plural forms, and article use, then proofread longer sentences for clear clause structure.

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.