Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-20

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 6.5)

clean water is indispensable for human survival leading may agree that it is a fundamental human right that government should deliver to every household without cost .nwhile i agree that a baseline amount of water should be gaurenteed to all citezens to protect public health ,i agree with the nottion that the entire wattrer supply should be completely free of charge.

on the other hand ,ensuring that every home has acess to clean drinking water is vital for preventing disease and poverty .when government provide a free minimum allocations of water for daily essentials such as drinking, cooking , and basic hygiene it significantly improves the quality of live, particularly for loe income families . for instance in several developing nation subsidized water intiatives have directly reduced basic basic hygiene—it significantly improves the quality of life, particularly for low-income families. For instance, in several developing nations, subsidized water initiatives have directly reduced the transmission of waterborne illnesses, lowering healthcare burdens and allowing children to attend school consistently. Therefore, treating a basic volume of water as a public service rather than a commercial commodity is highly beneficial.

However, providing unlimited water entirely free of charge is economically and environmentally unsustainable. The infrastructure required to treat, filter, and transport clean water to urban and rural households demands massive financial investment and continuous maintenance. If water were entirely free, governments would struggle to maintain these systems without heavily increasing taxes elsewhere. Furthermore, free access removes the financial incentive for conservation. Without a price mechanism, individuals are more likely to waste water on luxury purposes, such as watering vast lawns or filling private swimming pools, which exacerbates global water scarcity.

In conclusion, while access to a minimum amount of clean water is a basic human right that should be subsidized or provided free for survival, an entirely free supply is impractical. Implementing a tiered pricing model—where essential usage is free but excess consumption is charged—is the most balanced solution to safeguard both human dignity and resources

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear: you support free access to an essential amount of water, but not an unlimited supply. You address both sides of the issue and develop relevant reasons, including public health, the cost of infrastructure, and the risk of waste. The examples of waterborne illness and luxury uses such as pools help make the argument concrete. However, the opening is difficult to interpret because it appears to say both that water should be free to every household and that you disagree with the entire supply being free. The health-benefit example is also less clearly developed than the later economic argument. State your distinction between essential and excess use clearly from the outset, then explain how a tiered system could work in practice.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable overall structure: an introduction, a paragraph on essential access, a contrasting paragraph on costs and conservation, and a conclusion proposing tiered pricing. Connectors such as “However,” “Furthermore,” and “In conclusion” help signal the argument’s direction. Cohesion is less controlled in places, though. The opening sentence is hard to follow, and the second body paragraph contains a repeated and apparently duplicated passage about hygiene and waterborne illness, which interrupts progression. Some transitions also feel formulaic rather than linking the precise relationship between ideas. Remove the duplicated material, make each paragraph develop one main point in sequence, and use clear references when moving from the minimum supply to excess consumption.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use a suitable range of topic vocabulary, including “public health,” “waterborne illnesses,” “infrastructure,” “conservation,” and “tiered pricing.” These choices allow you to discuss health, funding, and environmental consequences with reasonable precision. However, spelling and word-choice errors in the opening—such as “gaurenteed,” “citezens,” and “wattrer”—reduce accuracy, while phrases such as “luxury purposes” are not quite natural in context. The duplicated wording also makes the vocabulary seem less controlled. Proofread carefully and favour established collocations, for example “luxury uses” or “non-essential consumption.” More consistent accuracy with these expressions would make your otherwise relevant vocabulary more effective.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a conditional sentence (“If water were entirely free…”) and a relative clause describing the pricing model. These forms help express cause, contrast, and recommendation, and the main argument is generally understandable. Some grammatical errors remain, particularly in the opening, where the sentence structure makes your position difficult to follow. There are also issues with agreement and sentence construction, as in “when government provide a free minimum allocations,” and punctuation is inconsistent, with spaces before full stops and commas. Review subject–verb agreement, singular and plural forms, and sentence boundaries. A carefully edited opening and more consistently punctuated sentences would improve control.

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.