Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-14
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 7.0)
Access to clean water is undoubtedly essential for human survival, and many people argue that every household should receive a free water supply. I partly disagree with this view, because although governments should guarantee access to safe drinking water, providing unlimited water completely free of charge is neither practical nor necessary.
On the one hand, clean water should be considered a basic necessity and should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their financial situation. Poor families may struggle to afford essential utilities, and cutting off their water supply could lead to serious health problems. Governments therefore have a responsibility to ensure that every citizen has access to a minimum amount of safe water. For example, low-income households could be provided with a basic quantity of water free of charge or receive substantial subsidies. This would protect vulnerable people while ensuring that their fundamental needs are met.
On the other hand, making all household water completely free could encourage excessive consumption and place a considerable financial burden on governments. Water treatment, transportation and infrastructure maintenance are expensive, and these costs have to be a covered somehow. Furthermore, when people do not have to pay for their consumption, they may be less motivated to conserve water. This could be particularly problematic in regions that regularly experience droughts or water shortages. A more effective approach would therefore be to provide a basic amount of water for free and charge households for excessive usage. In this way, people's essential needs woud be protected while unnecessary waste could be discouraged.
In conclusion, I believe that clean water should be guaranteed as a basic human right, but this does not mean that unlimited household water should be provided free of charge. A system offering a free basic allowance alongisde reasonable charges for additional consumption would be a fairer and more sustainable solution.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 7.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 6.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 7.0 |
| Overall | 7.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 7.0
The response fully addresses all parts of the task by taking a clear, nuanced position ('I partly disagree with this view'). The writer successfully balances two key arguments: acknowledging the government's obligation to ensure access to clean water as a basic human right, while arguing against entirely free, unlimited consumption due to economic and environmental implications. Ideas are well-developed and supported with relevant examples, such as low-income subsidies and the risk of water shortages during droughts. The position is maintained consistently throughout the essay, leading to a natural and well-reasoned conclusion. There are no omissions or tangential ideas, making this a strong performance that fully meets the criteria for Band 7.5 to Band 8.0.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5
The essay demonstrates a clear logical organisation and progression throughout. Information and ideas are coherently structured, moving smoothly from the introduction to distinct 'on the one hand' and 'on the other hand' body paragraphs, and finishing with a cohesive conclusion. Cohesive devices are used effectively and flexibly, including phrases like 'Furthermore', 'A more effective approach would therefore be', and 'In this way'. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, with each paragraph focusing on a central theme. While cohesion is generally well-managed, it does not quite reach the effortless fluidity required for Band 8, placing it firmly at Band 7.
Lexical Resource — Band 6.5
The student uses a sufficient range of vocabulary with good flexibility and precision, demonstrating an ability to discuss complex topics. Less common lexical items are used appropriately, such as 'infrastructure maintenance', 'excessive consumption', 'financial burden', and 'sustainable solution'. Collocations are generally natural, and there is a good awareness of formal style suited to an academic task. Minor spelling or typing slips occur once or twice (such as 'woud' in the third paragraph), but these are isolated and do not impede communication. The vocabulary range is robust enough to easily secure a Band 7.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 7.0
The writer displays a very good control of grammar and punctuation, utilising a wide variety of complex sentence structures effectively. Examples include conditional and concessive structures such as 'although governments should guarantee access..., providing unlimited water... is neither practical nor necessary' and 'when people do not have to pay for their consumption, they may be less motivated to conserve water.' The majority of sentences are error-free, with only occasional minor slips (e.g., 'a covered somehow' in the third paragraph and 'alongisde' in the conclusion). Punctuation is accurate, and the grammatical control easily satisfies the requirements for Band 7.5.
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.