Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-28

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)

In this concurrent world, some people argue that water is mandatory need for human. Hence, every home ought to be have a right to utilise clean water without any bill. I partially agree, with this given assertion my supportive arguments along with the rationales, thereof have been discuss in the succeeding body paragraphs.

There are several factors why water supply will provide free of cost. First and foremost, water is an essential part of our lives, which using in our daily household tasks such as, gardening, cleaning and cooking or many so on. Moreover, if the government not recieve any money for the water suppy so the public can easily access to water usage. Another benefit is, individuals may save a large amount of money which they spend on water bills. so, they will able to spend that money on other important things.

On the contrary, if the water will supply free of cost to every house so it will be higher chance people may forget the value of water. As a result, they can utilise water on unneccesary things which can waste considerably amount of water. In addition, free water supply may also create lazyness among the people,r because they might be not maintance the old taps or other water sources. Therefore, pay off the water bills supply can create bad habits among the people as they using more water without any concern.

In conclusion, it is evident from the above discussion that, although having free water supply can helps individuals to save their money. But, it lead to be spluluring the precious water and people may lose their environment responsibilities. Thus, the government can reduce the amount of water bill instead of properly

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The candidate addresses the prompt by taking a partially agreeing position and providing arguments for both sides. The introduction sets up this stance, although the phrasing is slightly awkward ("I partially agree, with this given assertion..."). In the body paragraphs, the writer attempts to present reasons for providing free water, such as helping with daily tasks and saving money, and counter-arguments about potential water wastage and laziness. However, these ideas remain somewhat underdeveloped and repetitive, leaning on generalisations without deep extension. For example, the argument regarding laziness and unmaintained taps is introduced but lacks strong supporting details. Consequently, the task response aligns best with Band 6, as all parts of the prompt are addressed with relevant, albeit somewhat basic and under-developed, ideas.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with standard paragraphing dividing the introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Transitional phrases like "First and foremost," "On the contrary," and "In conclusion" are utilised to guide the reader through the structure. However, referencing and cohesion are at times faulty or mechanical. For instance, the sentence connectors and subject-verb links occasionally stumble, as seen in "if the water will supply free of cost" and the abrupt transition "so, they will able to spend..." Furthermore, the conclusion contains grammatical disruption that breaks the flow ("Thus, the government can reduce the amount of water bill instead of properly"). Overall organisation is present, but logical progression suffers due to awkward sentence-level cohesion, placing this response solidly at Band 5.5.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, allowing the writer to communicate basic arguments about water supply and household expenses. The student attempts some less common vocabulary items such as "concurrent world," "assertion," and "splurging," but these are often misused or awkwardly collocated, such as "concurrent world" instead of "contemporary world" and "spluluring" (a spelling error for splurging). There are several noticeable spelling and word-choice errors throughout the text, including "recieve," "suppy," "unneccesary," and "lazyness." While these errors do not completely impede communication, they restrict the lexical range and accuracy, pointing directly to a Band 5.5 performance.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, though attempts at complex structures are frequently marred by grammatical errors and poor control. Examples of errors include "every home ought to be have a right," "if the government not recieve any money," and "if the water will supply free of cost." Punctuation and article usage are also inconsistent, with frequent comma splices and missing articles. The high frequency of grammatical inaccuracies causes some difficulty for the reader and means that error-free sentences are relatively rare, preventing the writing from achieving a Band 6. Therefore, a Band 5.0 is appropriate here, reflecting a limited range of structures with frequent errors.

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.