Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

It is widely believed that access to clean water is a basic human right. Therefore every home should have a water supply that is provided without any charge. I largely disagree with this viewpoint because people may waste water and government cannot take tax revenue.

There are numerous reasons why I disagree with this idea. One of the most significant reasons is individuals may waste water, if they get water without any costs. This is mainly because which is human nature, if they get anything free of charge, they may not evaluate. Even though water is the most beneficial thing for people, people often waste and they cannot evaluate it, which may detrimental for environment. As a result, if water supply that is needed charge, individuals may evaluate it. A good illustration of this is that numerous people waste water because of charge is free. Government should take effective measures to reduce waste of water.

A further point in against of every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge is that government cannot take tax revenue, which may harmful to the countries economy. Although water is a basic human right, government should take tax and earn money, which may play a crucial role in the countries economy. As a consequence, tax contributes to better country. For example, if government takes tax by water, this money will be used for lots of sectors, such as; healthcare sectors, sports and construction etc. Therefore, it is clear that every home should take money for water supply and then they will give few percentage for the authority of the country, which is beneficial for economy.

To conclude, access to fresh water is a basic human right. People may waste water as well as government cannot get any money by water. So, that is why I largely disagree with this.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the introduction: you largely disagree, and the conclusion returns to that view. You also give two relevant reasons—possible water wastage and the government’s need for revenue—and include an example of public spending on healthcare, sports and construction. However, the first reason is not fully explained: the claim that people waste water because it is free is asserted rather than supported with a specific example or explanation of how charging would change behaviour. The revenue argument also needs more precise development, since you do not explain why water charges, rather than taxes or other funding, are necessary. Develop these points and acknowledge how free access could protect households’ basic needs.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting separate reasons, and a conclusion. Signposting such as “One of the most significant reasons,” “A further point,” and “To conclude” helps readers follow the argument. However, some links are mechanical or unclear. For example, “As a result, if water supply that is needed charge” makes the relationship between charging and careful use difficult to follow, while “Therefore” and “As a consequence” sometimes repeat rather than advance the reasoning. The example about government spending also needs a clearer link to the claim about water charges. Use more precise referencing and ensure each sentence develops the point immediately before it.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate your main ideas, including “basic human right,” “tax revenue,” “environment,” and “healthcare sectors.” There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “play a crucial role” and “effective measures.” However, several inaccurate or unnatural choices limit precision: “in against of,” “evaluate” where you mean value or conserve, and “few percentage” make parts of the argument awkward. Repetition of “water,” “government,” and “people” also restricts flexibility. Aim to learn common collocations for this topic and vary repeated nouns with clear alternatives, while checking word forms and countability.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including conditional structures such as “if they get water without any costs” and a relative clause beginning “which may…” This shows some range, but errors in sentence construction and clause formation are persistent enough to affect clarity. For example, “This is mainly because which is human nature” is not a complete, well-formed explanation, and “if water supply that is needed charge” has an unclear clause structure. There are also issues with articles, agreement and punctuation, as in “government cannot take tax revenue” and the comma before “if” in “waste water, if they get…”. Practise building accurate conditional and cause-and-effect sentences before adding complexity.

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.