Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-29

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 often said that safe drinking water is something every person deserves, and that governments should therefore provide it to all homes without charge. I completely agree with this view.

Firstly, water is essential for human survival, unlike many other services that people pay for. Without water, people can't survive more than few days, whereas services like television or the internet are simply for convenient and entertainment. For instance, while people can live without television or internet access, no one can survive without water. If clean water isn't provided for free of charge, poor family have to use alternative source which may increased their health problems.

Secondly, without clean water health problems may arise which can be harmful for the society. This is because disease caused by the dirty water can result in diarrhea or cholera which can spread quickly throughout the community placing a strain on public healthcare systems and reducing overall productivity. For example, in some developed countries outbreak of waterborne disease have overwhelmed hospital and led to significant loss of productivity, as sick worker are unable to attend their job. As a result, ensuring every household has access to clean water for free can prevent out break and protect public health on a larger scale.

In conclusion, since access to clean water is essential for human survival and its absence can lead to serious health problems as well as broader economic consequences for society, I firmly believe that every household should be provided with a free water supply, regardless of the family's income or financial situation.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The response clearly addresses the prompt and maintains a consistent position throughout. The arguments regarding human survival and public health are relevant and logically extended. However, the development is slightly uneven; while the health argument is well-supported with examples, the economic argument could have been explored with more depth. The ideas are clearly presented, and the conclusion effectively reinforces the initial stance. To reach a higher band, ensure that all points are fully developed with equal weight, perhaps by discussing the potential economic burden on governments in more detail to provide a more balanced view of the 'free of charge' aspect.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 7.0

The essay is logically organized with a clear introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Cohesive devices such as 'Firstly', 'Secondly', 'For instance', and 'As a result' are used effectively to guide the reader through the argument. Paragraphing is used appropriately, with each paragraph focusing on a central theme. The progression of ideas is smooth and easy to follow. To improve, the writer could vary the cohesive devices further to avoid a slightly mechanical feel, as some transitions are quite standard.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

The vocabulary is generally appropriate for the task and conveys meaning clearly. There is an attempt to use topic-specific terminology like 'waterborne disease', 'public healthcare systems', and 'productivity'. However, there are some minor inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as 'alternative source' (should be plural 'sources'), 'increased' (should be 'increase'), and 'out break' (should be one word 'outbreak'). While these errors do not impede communication, they prevent the essay from reaching a higher band. A wider range of sophisticated vocabulary would enhance the overall quality.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There is good control over basic grammar, but there are several recurring errors that affect accuracy. Examples include 'poor family have' (should be 'poor families have'), 'few days' (should be 'a few days'), 'sick worker are' (should be 'sick workers are'), and 'hospital' (should be plural 'hospitals'). These errors are frequent enough to be noticeable but do not cause difficulty for the reader. To improve, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and pluralization rules.

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.