Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-31

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 cleanwater is a fundamental right of every person. I believe that access to clean water msut be free for everyone.

Clean drinkable water should be made free by the government for ease of its people, as its essential for good health and survival It's indespensible for various reasons such as cooking, disinfection, and maintaing personal hygeine.

For instance in karachi pakistan, the water is salty because of the arabian sea and limited fresh water resource. the residents are unable to drink it or use it on daily basis for other chores, so they have to privately buy from various companies and this sometimes lead to shortage and then its only available to wealthy influential citizens and many low socio economic groups have to suffer or rely on the contaminated water, which pose serious health issues. if governmaent makes it free of charge and available for everyone fewer problems would arise. Fre access facilitates and benifits the society and promotes equality.

On the other hand i understand why some people would disagree as when something is made free it somehow loses its value and people might start wasting the water and won't appreciate the availability of clean fresh water. In this case a bill may be charged to those with higer than normal consumption to reduce the wastage and educate the users to be vigilant about their usage. The availability of clean water should not be dependant on one's financial situation. Government may collect the funds for water by taxation.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the opening: you believe clean water should be free, and you return to the principle that access should not depend on a person’s finances. You address both the case for free provision and a counterargument about waste, then suggest charging for unusually high consumption and funding provision through taxation. The Karachi example is relevant and gives the argument a practical basis. However, some points are asserted more than explained: for example, the claim that free access would lead to fewer problems could be linked more explicitly to affordability and public health, while the proposed consumption charge needs clearer detail. Developing these connections and supporting each main idea more fully would strengthen the response.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a recognisable progression: it states a view, explains the health rationale, gives a local example, and then considers an opposing concern before concluding with a funding suggestion. Paragraphing helps distinguish these stages, and phrases such as “For instance” and “On the other hand” guide the reader. Some links are less smooth or precise, however. The Karachi example contains several consequences in one long sequence, making the relationship between private purchasing, shortages, and unequal access harder to follow. The final paragraph also moves quickly from waste to billing and taxation. Break these chains into clearer sentences and use explicit references to show how each proposed measure answers the concern raised.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range for the topic, including relevant terms such as “fundamental right,” “contaminated water,” “socio economic groups,” and “financial situation.” These choices help communicate the central argument, and the response attempts some less common vocabulary. However, spelling and word-choice inaccuracies are noticeable, including “indespensible,” “maintaining,” “benifits,” and “vigilant,” while phrases such as “ease of its people” and “higher than normal consumption” are not fully natural or precise in context. These errors do not prevent understanding, but they limit the accuracy and flexibility of the vocabulary. Proofread spelling and practise common collocations for public services, affordability, and water use.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including a conditional proposal: “if government makes it free of charge … fewer problems would arise.” The main ideas remain understandable, but some grammatical and punctuation errors recur. For example, “as its essential” needs a subject and verb form such as “as it is essential,” and “this sometimes lead” has a subject–verb agreement problem. The Karachi example runs through several clauses without clear sentence boundaries, and the final sentence of the opening body paragraph lacks punctuation after “survival.” These issues make some relationships less clear. Check agreement, articles, and sentence boundaries, and divide long sentences while retaining a mix of structures.

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.