Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-09

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)

There is an ongoing debate about whether access to clean water should be provided free of cost or citizens have to pay for that. This essay will explain that why I completely disagree with the statement.

One of the major disadvantage of providing clean water without any cost to every household is that it may create an issue of excess use of water which can lead to wastage of water. Therefore, many citizens might use excess water without any reason. For example: a person gets free access of water without paying any cost he might misuse the water and spend more water on their daily usage.

Another major disadvantage of free access to clean water for every household is that water is limited resource in the world. Whereas only 5 to 6% of water is drinkable and can be used for daily activities. Furthermore, if people get free access of clean water then the clean water might get finished more faster than the usual years which would lead to shortage of clean water in the world. In result, after few decades people might need to use water purifiers to get clean water and they need to use salty water for their daily usage.

In conclusion, I completely agree with the statement that access to clean water is our basic human right but the more usage of clean water can be harmful and it can lead to shortage of clean water. Hence, I completely disagree with the statement of providing free access of water supply to public.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you oppose free household water, while acknowledging that clean water is a basic right. The two main reasons—possible waste and limited drinkable water—are relevant, and you attempt to support them with an example and an explanation of future shortages. However, the example about a person using more water is hypothetical and repeats the point rather than showing its consequences in detail. The claim that only 5 to 6% of water is drinkable also needs clarification or support, and the discussion of purifiers and salty water is not fully explained. Develop the reasoning more carefully and distinguish access to a basic supply from unlimited free use to address the issue more fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting separate reasons, and a conclusion that restates your position. Sequencing is generally easy to follow, and connectors such as “Furthermore” and “In conclusion” help signal the stages of the argument. Some cohesion is mechanical, however, with repeated use of “Another major disadvantage” and “free access to clean water.” The example in the first body paragraph largely repeats the preceding claim, while the transition from water scarcity to purifiers and salty water is not clearly explained. Use more varied referencing and make the links between cause and consequence explicit so the argument progresses more smoothly.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough vocabulary to communicate the topic and your main ideas, including “excess use,” “wastage,” “limited resource,” and “shortage.” These choices show an attempt to discuss consequences rather than relying only on very basic terms. However, several phrases are repetitive or imprecise, such as “without any cost,” “free access,” and “more usage,” and some combinations are unnatural, including “finished more faster” and “salty water for their daily usage.” These do not prevent the reader from understanding your position, but they limit precision and naturalness. Build a wider set of accurate collocations for water supply, conservation, and pricing, and check word forms when revising.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mix of simple statements and longer sentences with clauses, for example, “Furthermore, if people get free access of clean water then…” This gives the response some structural variety, and the overall meaning remains clear. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly with agreement, articles, and sentence construction: “One of the major disadvantage” should use a plural noun, and “water is limited resource” needs an article. The opening phrase “explain that why” also has an unnecessary conjunction, while the example beginning “a person gets free access…” is not joined cleanly to the preceding sentence. Practise checking agreement and articles, and punctuate or restructure long sentences so each clause is clearly connected.

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.