Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-13

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)

Clean water should be available to every person as a fundamental human right. Therefore every home should receive a water supply free of charge. I think water is very neccessry of every home so it should be free of charge but not completely.

First, i agree with free of charge water in some ways, because some people are very poor they can not pay the bill of water, so it would be easier for them. If water would be free people can use water for washing cloths and washing dishes. So evey person can use water without any fear. We can install filter at home and drink clean water, so it would be beneficial for our health, and we can stay healthy. If water would be free we can grow crops in our field and earn good money.

Secondly, i disagree with free water in some ways like, in my opinion, water should not be provided completely free of charge. If water would be completely free then people waste water to much. People should pay a reasonable amount for water reduse. When the money collected from water bills can help improve the water supply. The government needs to provid clean water.

In conclusion, it is a good topic for our daily life therfore we should use water for much needed time , we should not waste water because water is very neccessry items for our next jenration. So i agree that people should use not much water it is useful for us.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You address the question and present a partly qualified position: water should be free for people who cannot afford it, but not entirely free because payment can discourage waste and fund improvements. These points are relevant, and the examples about household use and farming help explain why access matters. However, the position is not consistently clear: the opening says water “should be free of charge but not completely,” while the conclusion shifts to saying people should “use not much water” without clearly restating who should pay or how charges should work. Several ideas, such as the health benefit of home filters and the effect of free water on crop production, are asserted rather than explained. Develop the central argument with a clearer policy and more specific support.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs signalled by “First” and “Secondly,” and a conclusion. This gives the reader some guidance, and the contrast between support for free access and concern about waste is relevant. However, progression within paragraphs is uneven: the first body paragraph moves from affordability to washing, drinking, and crop-growing without showing how each point supports the same argument. Linking phrases such as “So” and repeated “If water would be free” make connections mechanical, while the conclusion introduces a general warning about future generations rather than neatly summarising the position. Organise each paragraph around one main reason, then use clearer references and transitions to show how examples support it.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate the main ideas, including “fundamental human right,” “water supply,” “water bills,” and “reasonable amount.” However, the range is limited and several words or phrases are repeated, especially “free of charge,” “water,” and “people.” There are also noticeable spelling and word-choice problems, such as “neccessry,” “evey,” “cloths,” “reduse,” and “jenration,” which can distract the reader. Some combinations are unnatural, for example “use water for much needed time” and “water is very neccessry items.” Build a more precise range for discussing affordability, conservation, and public services, and check spelling and collocations carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

Most sentences use simple patterns, and you attempt some longer clauses with “because” and “if.” These attempts show an effort to connect reasons, but control is inconsistent. For example, “If water would be free” is repeated where a conditional form such as “If water were free” is needed, and “When the money collected from water bills can help improve the water supply” is not a complete, well-formed sentence. There are also errors in sentence boundaries and punctuation, as well as inconsistent capitalisation of “I.” These problems sometimes make relationships between ideas harder to follow. Practise accurate conditional sentences and complete clause structures, then proofread for punctuation and capital letters.

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.