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)

People argue that access to clean water is a basic human right which everyone should have. Therefore, every home should have access to water supply which is free of charge. In my opinion, despite water is a basic need for everyone but, there should be a limited amount of free water available for everyone so that people don't misuse it.

We live in a society where there are people with different backgrounds present but every individual has a right on water supply. Providing everyone with free water will reduce it's value and, instead of using it on the right place they will use it unneccesarily. This situation will create problems such as water shortage and affect government as well. For instance, water is a basic necessity for activities like cooking, washing, gardening etc. If government will provide free water, people will overuse it and waste it.

Therefore, providing limited amount of free water to everyone will overcome issues like water shortage and it will create equality among people. As we live in a country where there is a poverty present and there are some people who cannot afford paying for water. Therefore, there will be equal supply of water to every house whether rich or poor. Moreover, as supply to free water is limited, it will add value to the same and people will think twice before wasting.

In conclusion, as water is a basic need to everyone and some people argue that there should be free supply of the same to every household. In my opinion, supply of free water should be limited so that people don't overuse it and it will reduce inequality among people.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you support a limited free allowance rather than unlimited free water, and you return to this view in the conclusion. You address the main issue with relevant points about preventing waste and ensuring poorer households can obtain water. However, some ideas are asserted more than explained. For example, you say free water would “reduce its value” and lead to overuse, but do not explain how a limited allowance would be set or what should happen when a household needs more. The examples of cooking, washing and gardening identify uses but do not strongly support the claim about misuse. Develop these points with a specific example or explanation, and clarify how your proposal balances basic rights with conservation. The response meets the stated length requirement; nine words copied from the task prompt were not counted.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: it introduces your position, gives reasons in two body paragraphs, and concludes by restating the proposal. The progression from concerns about waste to equality and affordability is understandable. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, particularly through repeated use of “Therefore” and “Moreover,” and several sentences are joined in ways that make the relationships between ideas less clear. For instance, the first body paragraph moves from the value of water to government impacts and then to household activities without fully connecting those points. Some references, such as “the same” in the conclusion, are also less direct than naming water or the proposed supply. Use clearer links between claims and explanations, and vary transitions while keeping each paragraph focused on one main line of reasoning.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate your main argument, including “basic necessity,” “water shortage,” “poverty,” and “inequality.” However, the range is limited by repeated general terms such as “water,” “people,” “supply,” and “free,” and some word choices or collocations are inaccurate or unnatural. For example, “a right on water supply” would be more naturally expressed as “a right to access water,” while “use it on the right place” does not clearly convey the intended meaning. There are also spelling errors, including “unneccesarily,” and the repeated phrase “free water” could be varied with precise alternatives. Build a wider set of accurate expressions for allocation, affordability, conservation and household consumption.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentences, including conditional forms such as “If government will provide free water, people will overuse it” and clauses beginning with “where” and “whether.” These attempts show some range, but several grammatical errors remain and occasionally make the relationships between ideas harder to follow. For example, “despite water is a basic need … but” combines two contrasting structures; use either “although water is a basic need” or “water is a basic need, but…”. The conditional would be more accurate as “If the government provided free water, people might overuse it.” Other issues include missing articles in “a limited amount” and “the government,” and punctuation that separates clauses awkwardly. Practise accurate clause construction, articles and sentence boundaries while retaining complex forms.

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.