Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-09

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 6.5)

Everyone has the right to clean water, due to which many people believe that every house should get free water supply. I disagree with this statement since many people will take advantage of this oppurtunity and waste water, and government money should be spent on other important areas instead of providing free water.

Commodities tend to be expoited if provided free of cost to the public. Free water supply would encourage people to use water indiscrimately and this would lead to its wastage. Over time this will create shortage of usable water which can give rise to a huge water shortage crises. For example when the government decided to give free water supply in our city, high wastage and subsequent shortage of water was reported. Water wastage is rampant in households even when water supply is paid. Excessive wastage will happen if it is made free.

The cost of supplying free water to houses is borne by the government. There are areas like defence, education and manufacturing where money of the government should be invested instead. When this money is used to provide freebies to the public, other fields in need of investment are left without sufficient funding which leads to reduced development in these regions. These days many state governments are providing water and electricity free of cost to the public, due to which other more important fields are not recieving sufficient funding.

In conclusion, water should not be provided free of cost to homes because people will waste water provided to them for free and government should invest their money in more relevant areas instead of supplying free water.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the introduction to the conclusion: you disagree with free household water, arguing that it may be wasted and that public funds have other priorities. Both reasons are relevant, and the example of free water in your city helps illustrate the first. This meets the task well, but the ideas are not equally developed: the water-wastage example is brief and lacks detail, while the funding argument mainly lists sectors such as defence and education without explaining how charging for water would protect investment in them. The response also treats free provision as likely to cause waste without considering safeguards or access for people unable to pay. More precise support and fuller development of these points would strengthen the argument.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The essay has a clear, effective structure: an introduction states your view, two body paragraphs present separate reasons, and the conclusion restates your position. The progression from possible waste to government spending is easy to follow, and linking phrases such as “For example,” “Over time,” and “In conclusion” help guide the reader. Some connections are a little mechanical or repetitive, particularly the repeated references to free water and wastage in the first body paragraph. The second paragraph also moves from government costs to several sectors and then to state governments without fully explaining the relationship between these points. Use clearer referencing and develop transitions between claims so the argument flows more naturally.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic-related vocabulary, including “usable water,” “water supply,” “shortage,” “investment,” and “sufficient funding.” These choices make your main points clear, and phrases such as “borne by the government” show an attempt to use more formal language. However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or awkward, including “commodities tend to be expoited,” “use water indiscrimately,” and “water shortage crises.” There are also spelling errors, such as “oppurtunity,” “recieving,” and “expoited.” These do not prevent understanding, but they limit precision and polish. Check spelling carefully and choose more natural expressions for describing waste, public provision, and financial priorities.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including cause-and-effect clauses such as “which can give rise to” and “due to which other more important fields are not recieving sufficient funding.” Most sentences communicate the intended meaning, and the paragraph structure helps make the argument accessible. Some grammatical issues remain. For example, “every house should get free water supply” needs an article or a different construction, and “government should invest their money” has a mismatch between the singular noun and pronoun. The long sentence beginning “When this money is used” also combines several ideas and would be clearer if divided or more carefully structured. Greater control of articles, agreement, and sentence boundaries would improve accuracy.

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.