Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-04

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)

Nowadays,it is topic of debate wheather the clean water should of free of cost or not.I partially agree with this statement. The upcoming paragraphs are going to discuss both points of views before reaching on certain conclusion.

Commencing with, some people are in the favour of free water because of some reasons, first and foremost reason is to provide clean water to each and everyperson with equallity.To be more precise, there are some people who lives under the poverty line and can not even afford clean drinkable water for them as well as for their family, which leads to many health issues. For instance, according to recent news ,majority the poor people suffer from digestive illness and infections after drinking unfiltered or dirty water.

However, many individuals have faith that if there should not be any charges on water, many masses may waste it. For example, some people washes their cars or other vehiles with pipes,which is major reson behind water wastage, this will only stop when people know thw value of water. As a result of this,residents will use clean water appropiately and limited in amount.Moreover, if government will not put any charges on water,it will put bad impact on nation's trasury, therefore, the other otems taxes may increase and imbalance the governments budget badly.

In conclusion,although water should be free in public as a facility to everybody, those should be fined who waste the clean water on roads, or on other useless things by this, people might value the clean water.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is stated as partial agreement, and you consider both access for people in poverty and the risk of waste and public cost. These are relevant reasons, with the example of illness from unsafe water helping explain why access matters. However, the position shifts in the conclusion: you say water should be free as a public facility, but do not clarify whether you still support charging households or how your partial agreement works in practice. The points about waste and the effect on the national budget are also less fully explained than the poverty argument. To strengthen the response, state clearly what should be free, who should pay, and how charges or penalties could prevent waste while protecting access.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two contrasting body paragraphs and a conclusion. The progression from the case for free water to concerns about waste and government revenue is generally clear, and signposts such as “However” and “In conclusion” help the reader follow the argument. This coherent overall arrangement is a strength. Some linking, though, feels mechanical or unclear: “Commencing with” and “The upcoming paragraphs” announce structure rather than develop the argument, while “by this” in the final sentence has an unclear reference. The conclusion also does not fully reconcile the two sides. Use simpler transitions and connect each example explicitly to the claim it supports; make the final position consistent with the introduction.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to discuss access, poverty, health, waste and public finances, including “poverty line,” “digestive illness” and “nation’s treasury.” There are also attempts at more formal phrasing. However, a number of word choices, collocations and spelling errors make the expression noticeably awkward, as in “free of cost,” “majority the poor people,” “bad impact” and “other otems taxes.” Several misspellings, including “wheather,” “equallity” and “trasury,” further reduce accuracy. Aim for natural, precise combinations rather than translating phrases literally, and proofread spelling. A more controlled set of common academic expressions would make your ideas easier to understand and more convincing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including a relative clause in “people who lives under the poverty line” and a conditional idea about charges and water use. This gives the response some structural variety, and the main meaning is usually understandable. Some errors in agreement, verb forms, articles and sentence construction remain, however: “people who lives” should use a plural verb, “some people washes” has incorrect agreement, and “if there should not be any charges” is not a well-formed conditional. The opening also lacks a space after the comma, and several long sentences need clearer punctuation. Practise accurate subject–verb agreement and conditional patterns, then check sentence boundaries and punctuation while editing.

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.