Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-12

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 6.0)

Many people believe that clean water is a fundamental human right and every home should have supply of it without any cost. I completely agree with as water is basic human need and it can contributed to healthy well-being.

People have some basic needs and water is one of them. Water comes from natural resources so it should be provided to people without any charge. One of the important aspect of being healthy is to consume clean water because polluted water contain germs and bacteria. Many people suffer from serious life-threating illness such as Malaria, Diariea and comsuming dirty water is one of the reasons for these. It can have a detrimental impact on human life. So, when people have to spend money for clean water they will start using any kind of water source to reduce costing. It will create uncessary burden and complication for an individual and society.

On the other hand, many big cities already suffering from clean water crisis which is rare in suburbs and rural areas. If people have to buy water for basic use and comsumption, they will tend to shift towards rurual areas as it can be expensive. Many lower and middle class family might not be able to afford it as they have other important expenses. Many bussiness and industry rely on clean water so they will suffer from this extra cost. It can become an obstacle towards progress of a city, country or whole nation.

In conclusion, i think water is essential for the survival of human being and it should be provided without any charge or fee.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the introduction (“I completely agree”) and remains consistent in the conclusion. You address the central issue by arguing that clean water supports health and that charging for it could disadvantage lower- and middle-income households and businesses. These are relevant reasons, and the discussion of polluted water gives the response a useful health focus. However, some claims are asserted rather than fully explained: for example, the suggestion that people would move to rural areas if water were costly needs clearer reasoning or evidence. The examples of illness also need to be more directly linked to unsafe water. The response covers the task well overall, but fuller explanation and more precise support for each main point would strengthen it further.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting related arguments, and a conclusion that restates your view. The progression from health effects to affordability and wider economic consequences is generally understandable. You also use signposting such as “On the other hand” and “In conclusion.” However, “On the other hand” suggests a contrasting position, while the paragraph continues to support free water, so the relationship between ideas is not accurately signalled. Some links between claims are also abrupt, particularly the move from water costs to people relocating to rural areas. Use transitions that reflect the actual relationship between points, and connect each claim with a clearer explanation.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “fundamental human right,” “polluted water,” “detrimental impact,” and “clean water crisis,” which helps communicate your argument. There is also an attempt to use more formal language. However, spelling errors and imprecise or unnatural combinations are noticeable, such as “life-threating illness,” “reduce costing,” and “extra cost.” Some wording is repeated, especially “water” and “provided,” and a few choices make the meaning less precise. Check spelling carefully and learn common collocations for this topic; for instance, say “reduce costs” rather than “reduce costing.” More accurate and varied phrasing would make the argument clearer and more fluent.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mixture of simple sentences and some longer structures, including conditional forms such as “when people have to spend money … they will start using” and “If people have to buy water … they will tend to shift.” These attempts help express cause and consequence. However, some grammatical errors remain, including missing articles in “should have supply of it” and “one of the important aspect,” and subject–verb agreement in “polluted water contain.” The opening phrase “I completely agree with as water…” is also structurally incomplete; it needs an object after “agree” or a clearer clause, such as “I agree because water is a basic human need.” Review articles, agreement, and sentence construction while continuing to practise varied complex sentences.

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.