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)

It is widely argued that one of the basic human rights is having access to clean water, which may require that it should be supplied for free in every house. I agree with this argument for multiple reasons which I will discuss thoroughly in this essay.

First of all, water has been known to be the main source of life for humans and animals since the beginning of time. The need for water is undeniable, specifically clean water for people. Though sometimes filtring water can be costly for governments, which makes citizens pay for water, although this cost is not that high and taxpayers payed for this already. Additionally, water is known to be one of the most redundant elements on earth, and it exists in different places like rivers, oceans, and ice mountains, which makes it truly inexpensive. That's why I think governments need to stop being greedy with how they offer water to their citizens.

Secondly, we see that water is a cheap resource for companies to cool their machines, for example, a technology corporation, like Google, uses water to cool down their servers which is much cheaper and easier to use instead of other ways. This wastes a lot of water, and these companies make water even more expensive for normal people, besides the fact that they sometimes pollute water sources like rivers. If governmental figures wrote legistlation laws to constraint water use by companies, this might help achieving free water access.

In conclusion, clean water is a necessisty for all humans, and is considered a basic human right. Countries should work on making it accessible and free of charge by being rationale about their pricing decisions, and by adding guardrails on inconsiderate corporations.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the introduction: you agree that clean water should be free, and the conclusion restates this view. You give relevant reasons, including water’s importance to life and the impact of companies’ water use and pollution. However, the first reason is not fully explained: the claims that water is abundant and that taxpayers have already paid for it do not clearly establish how every household can receive it free of charge. The discussion of companies also shifts toward regulating their use rather than directly explaining how this would make household water free. Develop the practical link between your examples and your position, and support the claims with more precise explanation.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay has a clear overall structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs signposted by “First of all” and “Secondly,” and a conclusion. The ideas generally progress from water’s importance to corporate use and then to your recommendation. Some connections, however, are difficult to follow. In the first body paragraph, the sentence beginning “Though sometimes filtering water can be costly” combines contrasting points in a confusing way, and the link between abundance and low household prices needs clearer explanation. The second paragraph moves from companies’ cooling systems to pollution and then legislation without fully showing how each point supports free domestic supply. Use clearer links between claims and consequences, and avoid relying mainly on formulaic transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a range of topic-related vocabulary, including “basic human rights,” “taxpayers,” “pollute water sources,” and “pricing decisions,” which helps communicate your argument. There are also attempts at more specific language, such as “cool their machines” and “guardrails.” However, several inaccurate word choices or spellings reduce precision: “redundant elements” does not mean abundant resources, “legistlation” is misspelled, and “necessisty” is also misspelled. Phrases such as “governmental figures” and “constraint water use” are awkward or imprecise in context. Aim for accurate collocations and check spelling carefully; this will make your ideas sound more natural and exact.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a relative clause in the opening and conditional language in “If governmental figures wrote legislation laws… this might help.” Most of the argument remains understandable, but some sentence structures and punctuation are not well controlled. For example, “Though sometimes filtering water can be costly for governments, which makes citizens pay for water, although this cost is not that high…” combines several clauses without a clear grammatical relationship. The opening phrase “which may require that it should be supplied” is also awkwardly constructed, and the second body paragraph contains a long sentence joined by commas. Practise separating contrasting ideas into complete sentences and checking that each clause has a clear subject and connection.

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.