Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-17

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)

Access to clean water is one of the basic human rights because water is essential for human survival. Some people believe that everyone should receive a free water supply. I completely agree with this opinion because water is necessary for good health and good life.

Firstly, clean water is essential for human good health and for survival. People need water for drinking, cooking and maintaining personal hygiene. If people do not have access to clean water, they may suffer from serious diseases. Moreover, poor families may not be able to afford water bills. Therefore, providing a basic amount of clean water free of charge would help everyone live a healthier life.

Secondly, free access to clean water can reduce poverty and inequality. In many areas, people struggle to meet their daily needs because of financial problems. If governments provide a certain amount of water for free, poor families will be able to save money for other necessities, such as food, education, and healthcare. However, people should avoid wasting water. Governments could charge money for excessive use to encourage responsible consumption.

In conclusion, I strongly agree that every person should haver access to clean water free of charge. Governments should provide a basic water supply to everyone while encouraging people to use this valuable resource wisely.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear throughout: you completely agree that households should receive clean water without charge. You give relevant reasons, including health, affordability for poorer families, and reducing inequality, and the suggestion to charge for excessive use adds a useful qualification. However, the health point is explained more fully than the inequality point, which would benefit from a specific example or clearer explanation of how free water reduces inequality. The response also does not meet the stated 250-word minimum, so there is limited space to develop and support your ideas. Expand the discussion with a relevant example and explain how your proposed basic allowance could work.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction states your view, two body paragraphs present reasons, and a conclusion restates your position. Sequencing is easy to follow, and signposts such as “Firstly,” “Secondly,” and “In conclusion” make the progression explicit. This is coherent and the paragraphs each have a clear focus. To make the organisation more flexible and less formulaic, use a wider range of links that show relationships between ideas, rather than relying mainly on numbered transitions. For example, connect the risk of disease directly to the need for a guaranteed basic supply, and make the transition from affordability to inequality more explicit. Developing the body paragraphs further would also allow smoother progression between claims and supporting explanation.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

Your vocabulary is adequate for expressing the main argument, with relevant terms such as “personal hygiene,” “financial problems,” “necessities,” and “responsible consumption.” Meaning remains clear throughout. However, several phrases are repetitive or imprecise, including repeated use of “clean water,” “free,” and “good health,” as well as the unnatural phrase “human good health.” The wording “good life” is also broad and does not add much precision. Aim to use more accurate collocations and vary key terms where appropriate, while avoiding substitutions that change the meaning. For instance, you could describe water as essential to “public health” and refer to a “basic household allowance” when explaining the policy.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, and most sentences communicate their meaning clearly. Conditional structures are handled well in examples such as “If people do not have access to clean water, they may suffer from serious diseases” and “If governments provide a certain amount of water for free, poor families will be able to save money.” The concession beginning “However” also helps show control of sentence relationships. There are some errors, but they rarely impede understanding. In the conclusion, “should haver access” contains a typing error that disrupts the sentence, and “for human good health” reflects an awkward grammatical construction. Proofread carefully and practise varying sentence patterns while keeping these structures accurate.

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.