Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-19

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)

It is a fundamental human right to get access to clean water. As result, every house should be provided a free water supply. This essay completely agrees with this view because many people cannot afford expensive water supply and individuals may develop various diseases if they are not given clean water.

To begin with, portable water should be free because most individuals are unable to afford expensive water bills. With the rise of inflation, it has become difficult for residents to afford basic necessities of life. In such case, if they are asked to pay higher cost water bills, this will put a huge financial burden on them. For instance, in rural areas many inhabitants prefer using water from wells because they cannot pay exorbitant prices of water bills. Therefore, water supply should be free for the public as it is their basic right.

Another reason is that free access of clean water can protect people from developing water-borne diseases. In developing countries, these diseases are very common owing to the fact lack of direct portable water supply. This causes many children and adults to consume water which is full of toxins and microbes, resulting in developing deadly diseases, which then leads to increase spending on medicines and doctor fees, putting burdens on impoverished residents. Consequently, every home should have water supply free of charge to reduce the incidence of harmful diseases.

In conclusion, I am of this opinion that portable water is a basic necessity, so all the residents should be provided with a water supply that is free of charge because not every one afford expensive water bills and also to prevent developing deadly diseases.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The response addresses all parts of the prompt and maintains a clear position throughout. The arguments regarding financial burden and public health are relevant and logically developed. However, the essay could be improved by acknowledging potential counter-arguments or the economic feasibility of providing free water, which would elevate the depth of the discussion. The ideas are supported with examples, such as the mention of rural inhabitants using wells, which adds credibility to the argument. Overall, the response is well-focused and meets the requirements of the task effectively.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The essay is logically organized with a clear introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Cohesive devices such as 'To begin with', 'In such case', and 'Consequently' are used to guide the reader through the arguments. While the progression of ideas is clear, some transitions feel slightly mechanical or repetitive. Paragraphing is used appropriately, and each paragraph has a clear central topic. The referencing is generally clear, though some minor improvements in the flow between sentences would enhance the overall readability and cohesion of the text.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task, with some attempts at more sophisticated language like 'exorbitant prices', 'impoverished residents', and 'water-borne diseases'. However, there are some inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as 'portable water' (the correct term is 'potable water') and 'lack of direct portable water supply' (which is grammatically awkward). The range is sufficient to convey the intended meaning clearly, but the lack of more precise or varied vocabulary prevents a higher score. The student should focus on using collocations more accurately.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While the meaning is always clear, there are frequent grammatical errors, such as 'As result' (missing 'a'), 'every house should be provided a free water supply' (missing 'with'), and 'not every one afford' (missing 'can'). Punctuation is generally correct, but some sentence constructions are slightly clunky. The majority of sentences are understandable, but the frequency of minor errors in articles, prepositions, and verb forms limits the score. Increasing the variety of complex structures while ensuring accuracy would be beneficial.

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.