Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-24

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)

Available access to clean water is one of the basic needs of human being and this essay agrees with the notion that water supply has to be free across all residential areas.

Water is required in almost all of our daily routines. It is nearly impossible for human to function without water. Research has shown that human can survive 7 to 10 days without food, however, it only takes 3 days without water for our body to give up. What seems to be the most essential part of our lives has become a privilege for those who may not be as financially secure as the rest of us. People who come from low income families may struggle to feed themselves regularly and with making water supply free of charge will be able to lift one of their financial burden.

It is also important to acknowledge that many families who have financial struggles often come up with different alternatives to fulfill their water needs. Some families in Indonesia utilize natural body of water for their water supply such as the lake, river, and ocean. However, this solution, while it helps with their water supply, does not guarantee the quality of the water itself. This can lead to poor quality of health, living condition, and even death due to long-term health complexities. That is why subsidizing water supply is a more appropriate approach to address this issue because prospering health and good quality of life are also a part of basic human rights.

In conclusion, there are many advantages that come with free water supply and everyone deserves to have access to clean water for their daily lives.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The essay clearly states a position in the introduction and maintains it throughout. The arguments regarding the biological necessity of water and the health risks associated with unsafe water sources are relevant and well-supported. However, the response could be improved by addressing the counter-argument—how such a massive infrastructure project would be funded—to provide a more balanced and comprehensive discussion. While the ideas are relevant, they are somewhat limited in scope, focusing primarily on the humanitarian aspect without fully exploring the economic or logistical implications of 'free' supply, which would have elevated the response to a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 7.0

The essay is logically organized with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each paragraph has a central theme, such as the biological necessity of water or the health risks of unsafe sources. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'however,' 'that is why,' and 'in conclusion,' which help guide the reader. However, the transition between the second and third paragraphs is slightly abrupt, and some cohesive links are a bit mechanical. The paragraphing is appropriate, and the progression of ideas is generally easy to follow throughout the text.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.5

The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task. You use some good phrases like 'financially secure,' 'long-term health complexities,' and 'subsidizing water supply.' However, there are some minor inaccuracies and awkward phrasings, such as 'natural body of water' (should be plural 'bodies') and 'prospering health' (which is not a standard collocation; 'improving health' or 'promoting health' would be better). The range is sufficient to convey your meaning clearly, but it lacks the sophistication and precision required for a higher band score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

You demonstrate a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are several grammatical errors, such as 'human can survive' (should be 'humans'), 'with making water supply free' (awkward phrasing), and 'the lake, river, and ocean' (should be plural). While these errors do not impede communication, they occur frequently enough to prevent a higher score. To improve, focus on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of articles and prepositions. Your control of punctuation is generally good, and the meaning remains clear despite the occasional slips.

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.