Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-10

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)

It is often argued that availability of pure water ia a basic human need. Thats is why all houses should have a water supply at no cost. some people may disagree with this view, I completely agree with this statement because it provides equal opportunities or benefits society as a whole.

The primary reason for my view is that clean water enables people to protect from diseases which directly linked to dirty water. For isntance, A person who drinks portable water usually stays healthy, In contrast an individual who lives in a desert region and does not have an access of clean water keeps unhealthy and usually get sick because of pure water inavailability. As a result, clean water keeps people healthy and fit.

Another key argument is that fresh and clean water should be accessible for all households. To illustrate, in developed countries natives are more likely to check the quality of water and their government also maintain the standard of water with the help of their experts twice in a year. Therefore, their top priority is the quality not the quantity of water.

In conclusion, some people argue that acess of clean water is not the basic need. I completely agree with the statement that pure water protects individual from certain diseases and also access of clean water should be accessible for all households. Overall, I believe that spotless water is the essentail right of every human being.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

Your position is clear: you state that you completely agree and return to this view in the conclusion. You also give relevant reasons about health and access for all households. However, the response only partially develops the task. The first body paragraph links clean water with avoiding disease, but the example about a person in a desert is unclear and does not explain how free household provision would work. The second paragraph discusses water-quality checks in developed countries rather than directly explaining why supply should be free, so an important part of the argument remains underdeveloped. The response is also 10 words below the required minimum. To strengthen the essay, explain who should fund free supply and support each reason with a clearer, specific example.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The essay has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. Linking expressions such as “The primary reason,” “To illustrate,” and “In conclusion” help signal the stages of your argument. However, progression within the body paragraphs is sometimes unclear: the desert example does not connect smoothly to the claim about free water, and the discussion of quality checks shifts away from affordability. Some connections are also repetitive, particularly the repeated claim that clean water should be accessible to all households in the conclusion. Use each paragraph to develop one distinct reason, and make the relationship between the example and the claim explicit. Clearer referencing and more varied transitions would make the argument easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “basic human need,” “diseases,” “quality of water,” and “households,” and the main ideas are generally understandable. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “equal opportunities” and “top priority.” However, noticeable spelling and word-choice errors reduce precision: “portable water” appears to mean “potable water,” while “pure water inavailability” is awkward and unclear. “Spotless water” is not a natural way to describe safe drinking water, and “access” is repeated frequently. Choose accurate collocations and check spelling carefully. More precise terms such as “safe drinking water,” “waterborne illnesses,” and “affordable access” would help express the argument more naturally.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including a relative clause in “diseases which directly linked to dirty water” and a contrast structure beginning “In contrast.” This shows some range, and the overall meaning can usually be followed. However, errors occur in sentence construction, agreement, articles and punctuation. For example, “which directly linked” needs a verb such as “are,” and “an access of clean water” has an incorrect article and preposition pattern. In “their government also maintain,” the subject and verb do not agree. Capitalisation and comma use are also inconsistent, especially where sentences run together. Review these patterns and proofread each sentence for a complete verb structure and correct punctuation.

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.