Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-27
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 an undeniable fact that humans need clean water for consumption, and it is their basic right. I believe although clean water is a basic need, providing water supplies to home free of charge is not appropriate because then human misuse that according to their needs.
Firstly, it is crucial that every home should have water supplies because life without water is impossible, however having it free of charge is not worthy because humans then take it foregranted and waste the most out of it. To elaborate, it has been clearly noticed that in most countries humans wash cars with a lot of water resulted wasting thousand litres of water. To avoid the same in many countries government put a ban on washing cars in certain hours and to do the same taking water in buckets is advisable.
Moreover, the proportion of water on earth is reducing day by day and clean water is just 0.1% available in the resources. So, it is advisable to use water efficiently in the right manner. Making the water available free of cost decreases its significant value. Although recycled water can be used for washing and in gardening, easily accessible clean water will deviate the humans from using the recycled water.
Thus, having some sort of bills on water is important so that humans uses them in a right manner and misuse should be checked by the regulated bodies. I disagree to the fact that clean water should be provided free of cost.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 6.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 6.0 |
| Overall | 6.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5
The response addresses the prompt by taking a clear position against free water supply. The ideas are relevant, focusing on the potential for waste and the need for conservation. However, the development is somewhat limited. For instance, the argument about water scarcity is mentioned but not fully explored in terms of how pricing specifically solves the issue beyond just discouraging waste. The essay covers all parts of the task, but the arguments could be more nuanced to reach a higher band. The conclusion is clear and reinforces the main stance effectively.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5
The essay is logically organized into paragraphs, each with a clear focus. Cohesive devices such as 'Firstly', 'Moreover', and 'Thus' are used to guide the reader through the argument. However, some transitions feel slightly mechanical, and there are minor issues with referencing, such as 'the same' used in the first paragraph, which is slightly awkward. The progression of ideas is generally clear, though the flow between the second and third paragraphs could be smoother to better connect the concept of scarcity with the necessity of pricing.
Lexical Resource — Band 6.0
The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task, allowing the writer to express their opinion clearly. There are some attempts at less common vocabulary, such as 'undeniable fact' and 'regulated bodies'. However, there are some inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as 'not worthy' instead of 'not advisable' or 'not a good idea', and 'take it foregranted' (should be 'for granted'). These errors do not impede communication but indicate a need for more precise word selection to reach a higher band.
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, particularly with subject-verb agreement ('humans misuse that', 'humans uses them') and article usage ('in the right manner'). There are also some awkward phrasings, such as 'resulted wasting thousand litres', which should be 'resulting in the waste of thousands of litres'. The control of grammar is sufficient for communication, but the frequency of errors prevents a higher score.
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.