Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-24

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 5.5)

Water is among the basic necessities of a human life. A clean water is therefore a source of richness to human health, for its proper metabolism and health perspective. A clean and fresh water must be available on the basis of free-of-cost and easily accessible to the entire humanity. Government should take into account the legal actions towards making maximum water reservoirs, to save its purity for human consumption. Industrial sectors that use highly toxic chemicals which are disposed off into streams, lakes or rivers, causing harm to people using that fresh water in villages or rural areas. In Pakistan, even today, there are areas where pure water accessibility is so devastated that people have to pay for clean water, otherwise they will have to use the water full of industrial toxins coming in the form of tap water and poor families who are unable to purchase the cost suffer with dangerous health diseases caused by drinking impure water like hepatitis, tuberculosis, and tumors etc. Millions of people every year die with diseases caused by harmful effects of impure water.

Government authorities and WASA must take appropriate notice towards resolving this issue and supply clean water that is free of cost to every individual in the areas where people die every year due to unhygienic or insufficient water supply. It is the utmost responsibility of our government to provide safety measures for people living in areas close to industrial sectors with a more secured environment provided clean water initiatives to these specific areas for a better life there.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses the prompt by discussing whether water should be provided free of charge, presenting a clear viewpoint that governments should ensure free and clean water access. The writer attempts to support this position by highlighting industrial pollution and its health consequences in regions like Pakistan. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited and lacks a balanced exploration of the counterargument regarding the economic feasibility of free public utilities. While the main stance is understandable, the supporting arguments shift quickly into specific regional examples without fully exploring the broader implications of universal free water provision. Consequently, the response fits best at Band 6, as it addresses all parts of the task with relevant ideas, but some points remain somewhat under-developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The essay demonstrates an overall coherent arrangement, but the logical progression is occasionally hindered by faulty cohesion and sentence structure. The text features only two large paragraphs, which limits the structural flow; separating the introduction, body arguments, and conclusion more clearly would improve readability. Furthermore, cohesive devices are sometimes misused or mechanical, such as the transition 'Industrial sectors that use highly toxic chemicals which are disposed off into streams...', which creates a sentence fragment rather than a smoothly linked argument. Referencing can also be unclear, as seen with pronouns like 'its' and 'that'. Despite these weaknesses, the progression of ideas is generally followable, aligning the response with Band 5.5 or a solid Band 6 in terms of overall coherence.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The student displays an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting less common terms such as 'metabolism', 'reservoir', 'toxic', and 'unhygienic'. However, there are notable inaccuracies in word choice, collocation, and word form throughout the text. Examples include 'A clean water' instead of 'clean water', 'disposed off' instead of 'disposed of', 'pure water accessibility is so devastated' instead of 'severely compromised', and 'purchase the cost' instead of 'bear the cost'. Additionally, awkward phrasing such as 'a source of richness to human health' detracts from precision. These errors are noticeable and occasionally cause mild confusion, but communication is not severely impeded, placing this criterion at a Band 5.5.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, but control over grammar and punctuation is inconsistent. There are several significant grammatical errors, including run-on sentences and fragments. For instance, the sentence starting with 'Industrial sectors that use...' is a fragment lacking a main verb. Other errors involve articles ('A clean water'), prepositions ('die with diseases' instead of 'die of diseases'), and subject-verb agreement or tense consistency. Punctuation is also weak, with long, unpunctuated clauses making some sentences difficult to parse. Because frequent errors persist and complex structures are often faulty, the grammatical performance warrants a Band 5.0.

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.