Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-31

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)

At present, recycling is a popular concept to combat environmental pollution. Some individuals believe personal wastes are not recycled at the extent it is necessary and government should pass a law to make it an obligation. In my opinion, legally making it a responsibity could be a useful step, as people often don't recycle it on their own without the external push.

First of all, making recycling legal necessity would ensure that citizens follow the rules. Otherwise, they would face punishments. This would make it a obligation and not a choice. For example, in countries like japan if citizens do not manage home waste properly, they would be penalized. Additionally, they could even face jail time. This step makes people understand the seriousness of the situation and the citizens act accordingly.

On the other hand, without proper laws people can be lenient and not do the waste management as they should. People who are responsible might recycle because of their own awareness about the harm it can bring to environment. But most people are not enough concern about long-term effects of not recycling. For them making it a legal requirement is a good policy. For instance, a person, who is lazy could leave their waste as it is. But if he knows that there will be penalty or punishment then even though unwillingly he would complete the process.

In conclusion, law makes people act properly with or without their choice. In the case of waste recycling, giving choice would mean that people have to be very responsible towards their environment. But by making it a legal requirement government could elimenate the risk of poeple not listening to them.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you support making household recycling a legal responsibility, and you address why voluntary action may be insufficient. The examples of penalties in Japan and of a person who might ignore waste sorting help illustrate your reasoning. However, the discussion is somewhat one-sided: the opening refers to the claim that laws are the only way to increase recycling, but you do not consider other measures, such as education or convenient collection services, or explain whether laws should be the sole solution. Some points also need fuller support—for example, the possible jail time is asserted without explaining how likely or appropriate it is. Develop these aspects and qualify your position to make the response more complete and persuasive.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. Sequencing phrases such as “First of all,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” make the stages easy to follow. However, the contrast signalled by “On the other hand” is not fully clear, because this paragraph largely reinforces the case for legal requirements rather than presenting a distinct opposing view. Some links between claims are also abrupt, such as moving from penalties in Japan to the general conclusion that citizens will act accordingly. Use paragraphing to separate supporting reasons from counterarguments, and make references such as “This step” and “it” more precise so the progression feels less mechanical.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “environmental pollution,” “legal requirement,” “penalized,” and “long-term effects,” which allows you to discuss the issue clearly. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “external push.” However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or awkward, including “personal wastes,” “at the extent it is necessary,” and “not enough concern about.” Spelling errors such as “responsibity,” “elimenate,” and “poeple” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more natural combinations and check word forms and spelling; for example, use “household waste,” “to the extent necessary,” and “are not sufficiently concerned.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mix of simple and more complex sentence forms, including conditional structures such as “if citizens do not manage home waste properly” and “if he knows that there will be penalty.” Most ideas remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. Examples include “it a obligation” instead of “it an obligation,” “making recycling legal necessity” without an article, and “a person, who is lazy” with unnecessary punctuation and an awkward relative clause. There are also agreement and sentence-control issues in “the citizens act accordingly” after a singular subject, and “government could” where a determiner is needed. Review articles, agreement, and clause punctuation, while continuing to practise varied sentence 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.