Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-28

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 7.0)

In recent years, there has been increasing debate about whether every household should be provided clean water free of charge, on the ground that access to safe drinking water is a fundamental human right. Although i believe that everyone should have access to this essential resource, I disagree that unlimited water should be completely free.

It could be argued that every household should be supplied with clean water, as water is a basic and natural right for every human being. From an ethical perspective, no human should be restricted from drinking clean water as it is vital for the human body, and assigning it a price would limit the access to it; especially for poor people. From an economical perspective, it was proven in history that depriving societies not only incite anger and dissatisfaction, but in many cases it also resulted even in riots causing chaos and threatening the general order and in the worst case scenario escalating the situation to a civil war.

On the other hand, providing unlimited clean water supply may cause significant burdens including financial strain and water stress. Putting a price on water makes consumers economize consumption and this results in economizing the water resources we have on earth and therefore ensuring these resources stay abundant in the long term. Additionally, supplying water, which needs expensive equipment like water pumps which run on electricity, needs an enormous budget which can't be easily provided subsequently causing a structural imbalance.

In conclusion, I agree that every human has the basic right of access to clean fresh water, but i also believe that water shouldn't be provided for free. This is mainly because of the financial difficulties and the water stress this can incur.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear throughout: you support everyone’s access to clean water but oppose making unlimited supply free. You address both sides of this distinction and give relevant reasons, including affordability for poorer households, conservation, and the cost of infrastructure. The discussion of water pricing is extended with a clear cause-and-effect explanation, while the point about deprivation leading to riots and civil conflict is more general and would benefit from a specific example or a more direct link to water access. To strengthen the response further, explain how a basic free allowance could protect the right you support while charging for excessive use. This would make the argument more fully developed and precise.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The essay has a clear progression: the introduction establishes your qualified disagreement, the body paragraphs present the ethical case and then the practical objections, and the conclusion restates your position. Paragraphing is effective, and signposts such as “On the other hand” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the argument. You also use cause-and-effect links, for example connecting water prices with more economical consumption. Some connections are less smooth: the shift from the ethical argument to historical unrest is abrupt, and the final sentence repeats reasons already given without adding much synthesis. Linking these points more explicitly and varying the way you refer back to ideas would make cohesion more flexible and less reliant on obvious transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 7.0

You use a sufficiently varied vocabulary to discuss rights, public services, and resource management. Phrases such as “fundamental human right,” “financial strain,” “water stress,” and “structural imbalance” show awareness of more formal language, while the meaning remains clear. There are occasional imprecise or unnatural collocations, including “economize the water resources,” “provided subsequently,” and “the general order.” Some wording is also repetitive, particularly the repeated use of “water” and “free.” Aim for more natural combinations and precise terms—for example, describe reducing consumption or conserving resources rather than “economizing” resources. This would improve flexibility and precision while preserving the clear, relevant vocabulary already present.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

You use a mix of simple and complex structures, including concessive clauses (“Although I believe…”) and cause-and-effect constructions. Several sentences communicate complex ideas clearly, and errors generally do not prevent understanding. However, some grammatical and punctuation issues remain. For example, “Although i believe” and “but i also believe” require a capital “I”; “no human should be restricted from drinking clean water as it is vital” would be clearer with punctuation separating the clauses; and “which can't be easily provided subsequently causing” has an awkwardly attached participial phrase. The long sentence about riots also becomes difficult to control. Breaking up or restructuring such sentences, and checking clause boundaries and capitalization, would help you show more consistent accuracy alongside your range.

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.