Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-05

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Access to clean water is a basic human right. Therefore every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge.

Do you agree or disagree?

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

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Every human deserves to attain pure water, so for this government should have provide a water line without any charge. This essay argue that water can be supplied to every home with no cost.Firstly, the importance of free water and secondly, its infrastucture.

To begin with, water is essential for living, as our body contains 70% to 80% water. Drinking pure water is a fundamental human right, while drinking a normal or polluted water can cause a lot of diseases. Pure water helps our body to eliminate wastes through urine. Humans can survive 3 days without drinking. Sometime, drinking unfiltered or polluted water can cause a lot of death cases. For instance, in some nations, governments have to face a lot of death cases due to dehydration.

On the other hand, every citizen is a tax payer, so its government's resposibility to provide pure and healthy water to their people. While the purification of water is cheaper than the production of oil, petrolium or other substances. Providing pure water can lead to a healthy nation and the youth of the healthy community work with more concentration. For instance, in belgium the supply of pure water at no cost looks a successful and benifical.

To conclude with, providing pure water is not only the fundamental human right essential for health and survival, but it's also a benifical for the government as it lead to a healthy nation.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you support providing water to every home without charge, and you give relevant reasons about health and the government’s responsibility. The examples about polluted water and Belgium also relate to the topic. However, the discussion is only partly developed: the claim that purification is cheaper than producing oil is not explained or connected clearly to how a free household supply would be funded. The Belgium example is asserted as successful but lacks detail. The response also contains 236 words, below the required 250, so there is limited space to develop your reasoning. Extend your main points with specific explanation and evidence, and clarify whether you mean free water for all use or a basic amount for essential needs.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. Sequencing phrases such as “To begin with,” “On the other hand,” and “To conclude” help signal the stages of your argument. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes unclear: the point about water in the body shifts quickly to survival time and then to deaths from dehydration, without showing how each detail supports free household provision. The introduction’s “Firstly… secondly…” promises a structure that is not clearly followed, and “importance of free water” is not developed as a distinct point. Use topic sentences that state each paragraph’s main reason, then connect each example explicitly to that reason. Avoid relying on formulaic transitions alone.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “fundamental human right,” “polluted water,” “purification,” and “dehydration,” which allows the reader to understand your main ideas. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “government’s responsibility.” However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate or awkward, including “death cases,” “a normal water,” and “a beneficial for the government.” Spelling errors such as “infrastucture,” “resposibility,” “petrolium,” and “benifical” are noticeable and reduce precision. Build a bank of accurate phrases for this topic, and check spelling and word forms carefully. Prefer natural expressions such as “deaths,” “untreated water,” and “beneficial to the government.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including a reason clause in “as our body contains…” and a contrast introduced by “while.” The overall meaning is usually recoverable, but errors are frequent and some sentences are difficult to process. For example, “This essay argue” has incorrect subject–verb agreement, while “the government should have provide” uses an incorrect verb form. Articles and countability are also problematic in “a normal or polluted water,” and the opening sentence has an unclear construction: “so for this government should have provide.” The conclusion’s “as it lead” also needs agreement. Practise accurate basic sentence patterns first, then add subordinate clauses and check verb forms, articles, and agreement.

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.