Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-12

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 that access to clean water is a basic human right, it should be given to every household free of charge. I agree that clean water is an essential need for every human and every house should have a supply, despite an expensive proposal.

On the one hand, if every house would have an unlimited water supply it would endanger the overuse of water and serious financial challenges. Water treatment, required funding, skilled labour and infrastructure. If water supply for be free for every consumer, eventually they would lack the responsibility of saving water and could overuse it. Take the example of California where the water crisis in 2011-17 was held because of overuse of it. People where doing overwater to their lawns and using excessive water to make swimming pools as it was subsidized. Eventually, emergency forced ruestrictions were made. Nations like Singapore have a nice system for this situation. They give affordable rates for necessary needs of water to households and charges extra if they need more.

On the other hand, many people have their argument for access to clean water ans their support to humanitarian reasoning. Water is a vital source not only just for drinking but also for cooking,hygiene and sanitation. Without it communities are vulnerable to disease like cholera, typhoid and many other with access to clean water. For example, the sub-saharan Africa, where million of deaths are caused every years due to the lack of access to clean water. Waterborn illness are also caused due to it. Governments, therefore, have a duty to ensure that citizens are denied this basic resource.

In conclusion, I will stick to the disagreement and the rules of Singapore where nice system is managed.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you disagree with making all household water free, while recognising that clean water is essential. You address both sides by discussing the risk of overuse and the humanitarian need for safe water, and the examples of Singapore and water-related illness are relevant. However, some points are not fully explained. The California example is difficult to follow, and the claim that water was subsidised is not clearly connected to the proposed policy. Your conclusion also refers vaguely to Singapore’s “nice system” rather than restating a precise recommendation. Develop the distinction between guaranteeing affordable essential water and charging for excessive use, and explain how this supports your position. (The response meets the required length.)

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two contrasting body paragraphs and a conclusion. “On the one hand” and “On the other hand” help signal the shift between concerns about overuse and the humanitarian case for access. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes unclear: the fragment “Water treatment, required funding, skilled labour and infrastructure” interrupts the first argument, while the California example and Singapore comparison need clearer links to the main point. Some references, such as “it” in the discussion of overuse, are not fully clear. The conclusion is brief and does not neatly resolve the contrast. Use complete topic sentences, connect each example explicitly to its claim, and make the final recommendation specific.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “water treatment,” “infrastructure,” “sanitation,” “subsidized” and “water crisis,” which helps communicate the subject. There are also attempts at more precise expressions such as “humanitarian reasoning” and “vulnerable to disease.” However, several word choices, spelling errors and collocations reduce naturalness and sometimes make meaning unclear: “doing overwater,” “emergency forced ruestrictions,” “Waterborn illness,” and “million of deaths” are examples. “Nice system” is also too informal and vague for an academic essay. Aim for accurate, conventional phrasing and check spelling and word forms; for example, describe “excessive watering of lawns” and “water-borne illnesses.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including conditional clauses (“If water supply for be free…”) and a contrastive structure beginning “Although” in the opening. However, control is uneven, and several sentence structures are incomplete or faulty. “Water treatment, required funding, skilled labour and infrastructure” is a fragment, while “if every house would have” and “If water supply for be free” show problems with conditional forms and verb construction. There are also errors in agreement and articles, as in “million of deaths are caused every years,” and punctuation is inconsistent, particularly around lists. Practise building complete clauses and checking subject–verb agreement, articles and verb forms. More accurate complex sentences would make your reasoning 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.