Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-03

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)

I believe access to clean water is a basic human right. Therefore every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge. It is required for basic human survival, there could be no life without water, and anything that becomes a hindrance in ensuring human survival is a violation of human rights. It should be provided free of charge to every household, as natural resources should not be controlled by wealthy people. And, if people would be given contaminated water, it could pose a life threat to masses. Any human being in this world deserves to have clean and safe source of water, as it is important for him to drink and to cook: a basic necassity for anyone to function. No one should be deprived of clean water, just like fresh and clean air. These are one of the things no one should have control over. If anyone is polluting the water or water reservoirs, they should be held liable as they are polluting the one integral need of human life.

If money will decide who will have water and who does not, then eventually only rich people will have clean and safe water. Consumerism has already done alot of damage to the society, at least there should be few things like clean water and air that should be everyones' basic right.

Goverments should only be allowed to charge for providing the sanitation and distribution related charges, other than that they should not be allowed to charge for water. This will ensure availibity of clean water to everyone equally and without any class divides of the society. If someone can not pay for related charges for them to have access directly in their houses, they should have designated spaces in the neigbourhoods where they can go and can access their basic human right.

To conclude, no one based on their class status should be given the amenity of having a basic human right, instead they should have it readily available and should not be charged for. Instead people should only be charged for costs associated to ensuring basic rights delieved to them at their doorstep.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

The response addresses all parts of the task and presents a clear position throughout that clean water should be a free basic human right, while acknowledging that distribution costs can be charged. Relevant ideas are introduced, such as survival needs, the avoidance of class divides, and the role of governments. However, some ideas are more fully developed than others. For instance, the discussion on consumerism and the comparison to air are somewhat underdeveloped and presented as broad assertions without strong supporting evidence. To reach the next level, every main idea needs full extension with concrete examples or deeper exploration, avoiding generalized statements that lack elaboration.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay presents a coherent overall arrangement and a clear stance from the beginning to the end. Paragraphing is utilised to group related ideas, such as separating the fundamental right argument from the discussion on government charges and distribution. However, cohesion is at times mechanical or somewhat faulty. Transition markers are basic, and referencing is not always completely clear, such as the pronoun use in sentences like 'These are one of the things no one should have control over.' Progression is generally visible, but logical links between sentences can feel abrupt. To improve, the writer should employ a wider and more flexible range of cohesive devices and ensure smoother transitions between sentences and paragraphs.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The writer demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task and successfully communicates complex ideas about human rights and economics. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary, such as 'consumerism', 'amenity', and 'liable', though these are occasionally accompanied by minor inaccuracies in word choice or collocation, such as 'life threat to masses' instead of 'threat to human life'. Furthermore, there are a few spelling errors, such as 'necassity', 'Goverments', 'availibity', 'neigbourhoods', and 'delieved'. These lexical errors and slips do not impede communication, allowing the reader to follow the argument easily. A greater precision in word choice and careful proofreading for spelling would elevate the lexical score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The text displays a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating that the writer can handle various structures. There are some errors in grammar and punctuation, such as missing articles ('to have clean and safe source of water'), awkward conditional phrasing ('if people would be given'), and slight issues with prepositions and subject-verb agreement ('Goverments should only be allowed'). Nevertheless, these errors are relatively infrequent and rarely impede communication; the majority of simple sentences are accurate, and meaning remains clear throughout. To move towards higher bands, the writer needs to incorporate a wider variety of complex structures with greater control, reducing minor slips in articles and verb tenses.

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.