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)

Around the world, the supply of clean water shall be free of charge as access to clean water is the human right, undoubtedly humans' should have access to it at no cost though they ought to be responsible for the use of it and should not waste it unnecessarily. Therefore, I partially agree with this statement.

To commence with, water is the necessity of every living being hence its access should be easier, also earth is covered by abundant amount of water that is neither clean nor drinkable. Though with the help of modern technology these saline water can be process as well as become drinkable, additionally, many nations already implement such technology for their residents such as Israel.

Although its the human nature, they do not care of stuffs that they find at free of cost and recklessly use it. Therefore, the government shall apply strict laws that citizen have to pay for the used amount of water in their daily life, it might be for various purposes like to drink, wash clothes, and take bath so, netizens' would be cautious. Also, such rules are already implemented by countries like Australia.

In the conclusion, access to clean or drinkable water is not only the fundamental right of humans but also be the responsibility, to use it in an adequate proportion. So, a requirement like water would be valued rather than being shadowed. Hence, every home should have a water supply but with a minimal cap that would remind them that water is not only their right but also their responsibility.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear: you partially agree, supporting access to water while arguing that households should pay for what they use. The response addresses both the human-rights argument and the question of free supply, and the examples of Israel and Australia are relevant. However, the reasoning is not equally developed. The point that water is abundant but often undrinkable is introduced without explaining how this supports free provision, while the claim that people waste free resources needs a clearer link to your proposed payment system. The conclusion’s “minimal cap” is also ambiguous: clarify whether this means a free basic allowance or a limit on consumption. More precise explanation and support would make the argument more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a recognisable structure, moving from your position to supporting points and then a conclusion. Paragraphing helps distinguish the discussion of access from the argument for charging users, and signposts such as “Although” and “In the conclusion” guide the reader. However, some connections are mechanical or unclear. For example, “To commence with” introduces the point about water’s necessity, but the following sentence about saline water does not clearly connect that point to your position. The opening sentence also combines several claims, making the progression harder to follow. Use clearer links between each reason and your stance, and make references such as “it” and “such rules” more explicit. This would strengthen the logical flow.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “human right,” “saline water,” “drinkable,” “strict laws,” and “fundamental right.” These choices make the subject clear, and the examples show an attempt to use more specific language. However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “abundant amount of water,” “find at free of cost,” and “valued rather than being shadowed.” There are also word-form or spelling problems, including “process” where a past participle is needed and “stuffs” in this context. These do not prevent understanding, but they reduce precision and naturalness. Aim for standard collocations and check word forms, especially when using less familiar vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a concession beginning “Although” and a relative clause in “a minimal cap that would remind them.” The main argument remains understandable, but some grammatical errors occur across the response. For example, the opening has faulty agreement and punctuation in “undoubtedly humans' should,” while “these saline water can be process” has problems with number and verb form. The sentence beginning “Therefore, the government shall apply” also needs a clearer grammatical structure around the claim that citizens have to pay. Several sentences are long and joined with commas, which makes their boundaries unclear. Practise accurate agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence punctuation while retaining your attempts at complex sentences.

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.