Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-07

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 6.5)

Clean water is a basic human right that people should have access to. Therefore every home should include a water supply that is provided without any fees. I agree with the sentiment, however there should be some clarifications on how this can be implemented.

Clean water is a necessity for any society to not crumble instantly. Clean water is used for a variety of uses for consumption with one of them being for drinking. Water is a perfect pathway for organisms and viruses to travel and any mismanagement can have catastrophic consequences. For example, severing a clean water connection to any population can inflict plagues and diseases as noted historically. Clean water is essential for showering and washing of clothes, where both are important for individual hygiene of each person. Without clean water, another problem arises as people do not have a reliable way to be able to drink water. Current urban settings feature buildings that are really old and only support water to be drinked only from tap. This is an issue because an example could be that the majority of population can be restricted from clean water access for drinking, not because of their fault but because of the buildings that they reside in. This can lead to an excess demand for water filters which may hike prices for everybody. Henceforth, a duty of every state must be to ensure that their citizens have access to a clean water supply whose infrastructure is maintained by the state in order to ensure the wellbeing of every person.

A point of contention is whether every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge. In this case it is more nuanced as it has to do with how well are the taxes of citizens utilized by the state. The perfect scenario where the state ensures that the money is received and not abused, can lead to a welfare system where the idea of every home having a water supply free of charge can indeed be a reality. However, the reality is that not only taxes do not go where they should due to corruption and mismanagement, but there is also an unfair welfare system where some citizens not only have to pay for the costs of their supply but also for other citizens as well. I agree that clean water is a basic human right and I do also think that every home should include a water supply as part of regulations. I believe that there can be two options available. Citizens should have the right of accessing a water supply built by the state if they pay a fee which should be fair to all economic classes, while also taking in mind how much they consume. However the second option is to also have it possible for citizens to build their own water supply from wells, rain retainers with some regulations in place. I think this is an optimal solution which guarantees fairness for everybody regardless of their economic situation, while also fostering independent solutions.

Access to clean water is indeed a basic human right. Every home should have a water supply, however it being free of charge is not realistic. A better option is to have egalitarian fee systems while also giving the freedom for people to pursue new solutions without being restricted from the state.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You address both the right to clean water and whether household supply should be free, and your position is ultimately clear: you support access but favour fair fees and alternatives. The discussion of public-health risks and the role of state infrastructure is relevant, while the final paragraph restates your view. This meets the task well, but the two parts are not developed equally: the case for clean water as a right receives several examples, whereas the reasons a universal free service is unrealistic are stated mainly through general concerns about corruption and unfair taxation. The proposed well and rainwater options also need explanation of how they would ensure safe, reliable access. Develop these points with a specific example or clearer reasoning to make the argument more fully supported.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, a paragraph on the importance of clean water, a discussion of charging and alternatives, and a concise conclusion. Linking expressions such as “For example,” “However,” and “Henceforth” help signal relationships between ideas. The overall progression is understandable, but some connections are mechanical or unclear. In the first body paragraph, the discussion moves from disease to hygiene, then to old buildings and water filters without consistently showing how each point supports the central argument. The long second body paragraph also combines taxation, corruption, fairness, and private alternatives. Group related points more tightly, use clearer references to the position being discussed, and make transitions express the precise relationship between claims.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “infrastructure,” “mismanagement,” “corruption,” “welfare system,” and “economic classes.” These choices allow you to discuss public health and policy beyond basic terms. There are also some imprecise or unnatural collocations that reduce fluency, such as “a variety of uses for consumption,” “inflict plagues,” and “rain retainers.” “Drinked” is an incorrect word form, and “really old” is informal for this essay. These choices do not prevent the reader from understanding your argument, but they show that less common vocabulary is not always controlled naturally. Prefer established collocations and check word forms; for example, describe water as being “used for drinking and sanitation” and refer to “rainwater storage systems.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including conditional clauses (“if they pay a fee”) and contrastive constructions (“not only … but also”). Most of the argument remains understandable, but some grammatical errors and awkward sentence patterns recur. For example, “how well are the taxes … utilized” uses question word order inside an indirect clause; “not only taxes do not go where they should” has faulty inversion; and “where both are important for individual hygiene of each person” is an awkwardly constructed relative clause. There are also issues with articles and sentence boundaries, as in “a duty of every state must be.” Review indirect-question word order, parallel structures, and clause construction, then proofread long sentences by separating claims where needed.

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.