Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-18

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)

Access to clean water is one of the fundamental human rights, and hence, many people argue that the providence cost should be free. Contrary to the popular debate, I disagree with the idea of clean water supply being completely free of charge.

Clean water is a part of our everyday life. Thus, it is crucial when it comes to maintaining hygiene and health concerns, as contrary to this can lead up to hazardous health issues like diarrhea, cholera, tuberculosis etc. Every year, many people, especially children, die of waterborne diseases. The notion of pure water is yet to enter many parts of the world. Different parts of Asia and Africa is suffering due to the unaccess to clean water supply. A recent study of Bangladesh's water supply has found toxic chemical compounds, i.e., microplastics, posing threat to the public health in the capital city of the country. So, monetizing such a mandatory element and basic needs might seem diabolical to many.

However, giving free access to this will only create more problems and financial strain in the government budget, especially in the least developed countries. Such countries need structural development in the first place to combat what is now a global problem. Lifting up the charge on water supply will put the government in stake. To draw and implement a structural and functional pollutant-free water supply system, government will need to recruit experts and skillful engineers to make a blueprint and install pipes, which overall requires a hefty fund.

Moreover, unlimited access to water will make the ordinary people less concern of the matter. No asset is abundant in nature. If people start misusing water, like leaving the tap water running non-stop while brushing or cooking, it will be nothing but a waste of an invaluable asset. People will start consuming more than what they need. An amount of charge is, so, necessary.

In conclusion, making people pay is necessary beyond description as a water conservation strategy. Water is an asset and a basic need, but giving access to that to the mass public will not be the solution we need in the long run.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The response addresses all parts of the task and maintains a clear, consistent position throughout. You effectively balance the humanitarian argument with practical economic and conservation concerns. The ideas are well-developed, particularly the point regarding the government's financial burden and the necessity of pricing to prevent resource wastage. To reach a higher band, ensure that the initial acknowledgement of the opposing view is slightly more nuanced, and consider providing a more specific example of how a tiered pricing system could balance affordability with conservation, rather than just arguing for a general charge.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The essay is logically organized with a clear progression of ideas. Each paragraph has a central theme, and you use cohesive devices such as 'However', 'Moreover', and 'In conclusion' to guide the reader. While the paragraphing is effective, some transitions feel slightly mechanical. For instance, the link between the health risks in the first body paragraph and the conclusion about 'monetizing' could be smoother. Referencing is generally clear, though ensure that pronouns like 'this' or 'that' always have a clear, unambiguous antecedent to maintain perfect flow.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

You demonstrate a good range of vocabulary, including terms like 'hazardous', 'diabolical', 'structural development', and 'invaluable asset'. There are some minor inaccuracies in word choice, such as 'providence cost' (likely meaning 'provision cost') and 'unaccess' (which is not standard English; 'lack of access' would be better). Additionally, 'put the government in stake' is an incorrect collocation; 'put the government at risk' or 'place a strain on the government' would be more appropriate. These errors do not impede communication, but they prevent a higher score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence structures effectively. There are some grammatical slips, such as 'Different parts of Asia and Africa is suffering' (subject-verb agreement error: 'are suffering') and 'less concern of the matter' (should be 'less concerned about'). Punctuation is generally sound, though there are occasional awkward phrasings like 'contrary to this can lead up to'. Despite these errors, the meaning is always clear, and the complexity of your sentence construction shows a good level of control.

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.