Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-11

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)

Acess to free and pure drinking water is the fundamental human right.This statement is quite arguable among the experts of different fields but has my support in all terms.

To begin with, the provision of safe drinking water has remained a debate for years among various professionals but all agree to the point that it is a basic and pivotal human right. Although many disagree, but as far as I am concerned it is quite inevitable that clean water shall be provided by the authorities to the public free of cost as a necessity, similar to the air one needs to breathe in order to stay alive. This demand is made purely on humanitarian grounds and reflects the equal division of resources of the planet among its dwellers. Water should made available to all households irrespective of country, race, colour or status. For instance, United Nations organization urged the countries on the globe to sign the Declaration of Human Rights pact ensuring that each individual gets the equal right to the resources on Earth indiscriminately.

Despite the agreement, many countries have failed to provide safe and pure drinking water to its citizens and those who have succeeded, charge their residents to drink clean water. They buy bottled water or its charges are included in utilities bills. Public has to pay for this water despite paying all the governmental taxes these include developed countries like America and even the developing countries like India.

Analogous to this, governments present their incentive that water resources are limited on Earth and paying for it familliarize the general public with its importance and lacking encouraging water conservation. It ensures the adequate use and consumption of limited water resources. This perpective may be positive and impactful but does not outweigh the significance of provision of water as a fundamental human right.

In conclusion, access to safe drinking water is the right of every being on earth whether a human or an animal.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear: you support free access to clean water, and you address the counterargument that charging for water may encourage conservation. The comparison with air and the reference to unequal access help explain the human-rights basis of your view. This meets the task well, but some points are asserted rather than fully supported. For example, the United Nations reference is broad and does not clearly show how the cited declaration establishes free household water. The discussion of charges in America and India also needs a specific example or explanation. To strengthen the response further, develop these points with precise evidence and explain how governments could provide water without undermining conservation.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, supporting discussion, a counterargument and a conclusion. Connectors such as “To begin with,” “Despite the agreement” and “In conclusion” help signal the stages of the argument. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes less clear, and some links feel mechanical. The second paragraph moves from the human-rights principle to the UN and then to household provision without fully explaining the connections. “Analogous to this” does not clearly introduce the conservation argument, while “Despite the agreement” refers to an agreement that has not been clearly established. Use more precise referencing and make each paragraph develop one main point in a clear sequence.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary and attempt less common expressions, including “pivotal human right,” “humanitarian grounds” and “limited water resources.” These choices show ambition, but some are inaccurate or unnatural, which limits precision. For example, “equal division of resources” and “familliarize the general public with its importance and lacking” do not express the intended ideas clearly. There are also spelling errors such as “Acess,” “familliarize” and “perpective.” Prefer natural collocations and check spelling carefully. More precise terms for public provision, household charges and water conservation would help you express the argument more fluently without relying on awkward or overly formal phrasing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including concessive clauses such as “Although many disagree” and longer sentences explaining the conservation argument. Meaning is generally understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. For example, “Water should made available” needs a passive verb form, and “many countries … to its citizens” has a subject–pronoun agreement problem. The sentence beginning “Public has to pay” also needs an article or a plural subject, and the opening has missing sentence punctuation and spacing. Review passive constructions, agreement, articles and punctuation, then check long sentences for clear clause structure. More accurate control of these forms would make your argument easier to follow.

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.