Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-29

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 5.5)

Nowadays, some people believe that not enough of the waste from households are recycled such as; paper, glass, garbage and plastic. On the other hand, others argue that only way to increase recycling is for governments to make strict law obligation rather than public doing this as voluntarily work. In my prespective, I completely agree with the point governments should definitely make a strict law for public to recycle their household waste. Further, I will explain my statement below.

Initially, people claim rightly about household waste and it is not enough recycled, mainly because we have to distingiush household waste we can't simply through rubbish anywhere. If waste has to be recycled it is important to differentiate between plastic, glass and paper but people nowadays don't do it by themselves and they expect government to do their job. For instance, in USA, people use three dustbins in which they through plastic, paper and glass seperately and it helps the collector. This is how everyone should follow the system.

Secondly, the government should make a strict law obligation in which it is mandatory for the people to through their garbage seperately and help in the cause of the government. Otherwise, the government should impose a law and people have to face strict punishment. For example, in Germany their is a strict law if you don't through your garbage in bins and without seperating it you have to pay fine.

In conclusion, I firmly believe with this point of view, the governments should impose a strict law and make it a legal requirement. Through this way we can increase the recycling system and we can make our country healthier, cleaner and happier place.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You give a clear, consistent position: you “completely agree” that governments should require recycling, and you return to this view in the conclusion. The response addresses the question with relevant reasons, including sorting household waste and using penalties to encourage compliance. The examples of separate bins in the USA and fines in Germany help illustrate your points. However, the discussion focuses mainly on making people sort waste and obey rules; it explains less clearly how legal requirements would increase the amount actually recycled or why voluntary measures alone are insufficient. Some ideas, such as the claim that people expect government to do their job, are asserted rather than developed. Explain the likely effects of enforcement and support each example with more detail to strengthen the argument.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction states your position, two body paragraphs present reasons and examples, and a conclusion restates your view. Sequencing phrases such as “Initially,” “Secondly,” and “In conclusion” make the progression easy to follow. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, and some links between ideas are unclear. For example, “This is how everyone should follow the system” does not explain how the example supports the need for a law. The opening contrast, “On the other hand,” also suggests opposing views, although the paragraph then moves directly to your own position. Use more precise links between claims, explanations, and examples, and make references such as “this point of view” more specific.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “household waste,” “recycled,” “mandatory,” “strict punishment,” and “legal requirement,” so the main ideas are generally understandable. However, the range is limited and several word-choice, collocation, and spelling errors make the expression less natural. Phrases such as “strict law obligation,” “public doing this as voluntarily work,” and “increase the recycling system” are awkward or unclear. There are also misspellings, including “prespective,” “distingiush,” and “seperately.” Aim to use accurate collocations and check spelling carefully; for instance, describe a law as “making recycling compulsory” and say that it can “increase recycling rates.” This would make your argument more precise and fluent.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including a conditional structure in “If waste has to be recycled…” and a relative clause in “in which it is mandatory…”. The overall meaning is usually recoverable, but some grammatical errors occur across the response. For example, “waste from households are recycled” has subject–verb disagreement, while “only way” and “a strict law” show inconsistent article use. The sentence beginning “Otherwise, the government should impose a law and people have to face strict punishment” also joins ideas in a way that makes the relationship unclear. Work on agreement, articles, and sentence boundaries, and revise complex sentences to ensure each clause connects clearly. More accurate control of these patterns would improve readability.

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.