Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-21
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 6.0)
It is common argue that clean water is the fundamental human rights, it should be supplied to every household entirely free of charges. While other argue it should be charges for minimal. I agree that basis access of safe water is essential for every human survival, I disagree with the nation that ultimate safe water supply should be completely free, as this could lead to excessive waste and strain public resources.
On the one hand, providing free water ensures that public health and social equilty. Water is indispensable for drinking, cooking and cleaning, without water human life could be stuck, individuals face severe health risks such as waterborne disease. For low-income families, paying utility bills for water can place significant fincial burden on their household budget. By guarnteeing a basic amount of free water, governmnets can ensure that no individual is deprived of a vital necessity due to poverty, thereby reducing inequality and improving overall quality of life.
On the other hand, offering completely free and unrestricted water to evry home often leads to widespread waste and insufficiency. When resource carries no no charge, people are far less likely to conserve it, leading to unmetered usages such as overwatering lawns, leaving taps running and waste massive amount of water. Furthermore, maintaining, treating and distributing clean water requires substantial capital investment and insfrastructure maintenance. If the government bares entire cost without collecting utility revenue, public funds maybe diverted from other critical sectors, such as healthcare or eduaction.
In conclusion, although access to clean water is absoulete necessity, providing an ultimately free supply to every household is economically and environmentally unsustainable.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 6.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5
The student addresses all parts of the task by presenting a clear position on whether clean water should be provided entirely free of charge. The introduction clearly states the writer's stance, agreeing that basic access is essential while disagreeing that it should be completely free due to waste and resource strain. Main body paragraphs offer relevant arguments regarding public health and social equality on the one hand, and resource conservation and infrastructure costs on the other. Ideas are extended and supported with examples such as overwatering lawns and low-income burdens, although some points like 'human life could be stuck' are slightly under-developed. Overall, the task is addressed well, fulfilling the requirements for a Band 6.5 or 7.0; here, the clear overall position and well-structured body paragraphs align closely with Band 7 descriptors.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0
The essay demonstrates clear logical organisation and progression throughout. The response is divided into logical paragraphs with a clear introduction, two distinct body paragraphs starting with cohesive markers like 'On the one hand' and 'On the other hand', and a brief conclusion. Cohesive devices are generally used appropriately, such as 'Furthermore' and 'In conclusion'. However, there are some instances where referencing is slightly clunky or mechanical, and occasional awkward transitions occur, such as 'While other argue it should be charges for minimal'. Despite these minor flaws, the overall arrangement is coherent and the logical flow is maintained from start to finish, fitting the Band 6.5 to 7.0 profile well.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The student demonstrates an adequate to sufficient range of vocabulary for the task, attempting less common items such as 'indispensable', 'waterborne disease', 'capital investment', and 'unsustainable'. However, there are several noticeable word-choice, collocation, and morphological errors throughout the text. Examples include 'fundamental human rights' (instead of right), 'free of charges' (instead of charge), 'basis access' (instead of basic), 'financial' (spelling), 'guarnteeing' (spelling), 'evry' (spelling), 'insufficiency' (inappropriate collocation for water scarcity), 'usages' (uncountable noun pluralised), 'waste massive amount' (grammatical mismatch), and 'absoulete' (spelling). These lexical inaccuracies and spelling slips prevent the score from reaching a higher band, placing the response firmly at Band 6.0.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, incorporating conditional and concessive structures like 'While other argue it should be charges for minimal' and 'By guarnteeing a basic amount of free water, governments can ensure...'. However, there are frequent grammatical errors in tense, subject-verb agreement, and word forms. Examples include 'It is common argue' (instead of commonly argued), 'it should be charges' (passive voice error), 'other argue' (missing plural/determiner), 'resource carries' (agreement), 'If the government bares' (wrong verb; should be bears), and 'funds maybe diverted' (spacing). Although these errors do not impede overall communication, they occur regularly and limit the proportion of error-free sentences, justifying a Band 6.0.
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.