Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-15

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)

While many people argued that access to pure, clean water is only for people who live in cities and who can afford them, I believe that it is a basic human right and hence every home should have a water supply that is provided free of cost.

Water is an important basic need for our daily activities without which we cannot think of a day. Pure water is essential for several reasons. First of all, drinking impure water can be harmful for our health as it leads to several diseases like cholera. Secondly, it can lead to skin diseases such as peal off skin. It can also damage our clothes if used for washing. However, some people think that only people living in cities should get pure water.

Most people are unware of the adverse effects of drinking pure water and many people pay less attention to these facts. As a result they start using water for harmrfull sources. Although there are several ways to purify water such as filtering, boiling water using chemicals and by using motors, Poor and low-income families may not able to do that because these methods are sometimes expensive enough. That is why every people should have a free water supply system.

To conclude, it is every people's right to use clean water so it is the responsibility of every home to make sure to supply clean water for drinking and using in other activities. If we can make people aware of the side effects of using impure water and provide them clean water without any charge only then it will be possible to reduce the number of deaths caused by water diseases.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The response addresses the prompt by taking a clear position in favor of free water supply. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited. While you mention health benefits and the financial burden on low-income families, the arguments lack depth and specific examples. The claim that 'some people think only people living in cities should get pure water' is a weak counter-argument that is not well-integrated into the essay's logic. To improve, focus on expanding your reasoning with more detailed explanations of how a free supply system could be implemented or the broader societal impacts of such a policy.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay is organized into logical paragraphs, and there is a clear progression of ideas from the introduction to the conclusion. You use basic cohesive devices such as 'First of all,' 'Secondly,' and 'To conclude' to link your points. However, the flow between sentences is sometimes mechanical, and there are instances where referencing is unclear, such as the phrase 'many people pay less attention to these facts' without a clear antecedent. Improving the variety of linking words and ensuring smoother transitions between sentences would enhance the overall coherence.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is generally adequate for the task but lacks the precision and variety required for a higher band. There are several instances of awkward phrasing or incorrect word choices, such as 'peal off skin' (likely meaning 'peeling skin') and 'harmrfull sources' (spelling error). You rely on relatively simple vocabulary, and there is limited evidence of less common lexical items or idiomatic expressions. To achieve a higher score, focus on using more precise terminology related to public health and economics, and pay closer attention to spelling and collocations.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The essay contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Examples include 'many people argued' (should be 'argue'), 'every people' (should be 'everyone'), and 'may not able to' (missing 'be'). Punctuation is also inconsistent, particularly with comma usage. While the meaning is generally understandable, the frequency of these errors suggests a need for more careful proofreading and a stronger grasp of subject-verb agreement and modal verb usage.

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.