Band 4.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-08-23
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in another country if they wish.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Student answer (Band 4.0)
The given information tell us that some people believe that professionals such as doctor, engineer, should be required to work in the country where they did their training but others believe they should be free to work in another country if they wish.
It is clearly seen from the given information is not according to the real data of the research.so in my opinion both people are right because many professionals have much more parental money but many people do not have much more parental money. people always work to earn money but these people had a ;it of money they do not interested in earn the money but they also maintain their profession.These people have not enough parental money they decide and work their,where they also earn money as their profession.
In my opinion the people they are professional they also work where they earn a lot of money. so they people who did the argue they are right but always not.Professionals think that they earn a lot of money where they will work.So the argument is correct but not full time.professional such as doctors, engineers,should be required to work in the country where they did their training, is always a argument line but not a clear line.
overall, professional have right to free work rule.So they will always work as a free worker not a bounded worker. For example a man I know him, he was from a lower middle class family, who was become a software engineer.He was work in a multi nation company,the company pay him a lot of money but who was not satisfied. So he was going America for a higher package and he had achieved four time higher money from American company.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 4.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.0 |
| Overall | 4.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 4.0
The response attempts to address both sides of the argument, but the ideas are underdeveloped and often unclear. The reasoning regarding 'parental money' is largely irrelevant to the core issue of professional mobility and training obligations. The student fails to provide a coherent argument or a clear, sustained position. The ideas are repetitive and lack logical support, making it difficult for the reader to follow the intended point. The response does not adequately discuss the implications of the two views, such as the 'brain drain' effect or the rights of the individual, which are central to this topic.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 4.0
The essay lacks logical progression. While there is an attempt at paragraphing, the internal structure of the paragraphs is chaotic. Cohesive devices are either missing or used incorrectly, such as the repetitive use of 'so' and 'in my opinion'. Referencing is often unclear, particularly in the second and third paragraphs, where the connection between sentences is weak. The flow of ideas is frequently interrupted by grammatical errors and confusing phrasing, which hinders the overall coherence of the response.
Lexical Resource — Band 4.0
The vocabulary is very limited and repetitive, relying on basic words like 'money', 'work', and 'people'. There is a lack of topic-specific vocabulary related to professional migration, economics, or education. Errors in word choice are frequent, such as 'argument line' instead of 'argument' or 'free worker' instead of 'freedom of movement'. The student struggles to express complex ideas due to the restricted range of vocabulary, which often leads to ambiguity and prevents the development of a sophisticated argument.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The essay contains frequent and severe grammatical errors that often impede communication. There are persistent issues with subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'professional have right'), tense usage (e.g., 'he was become'), and sentence structure (e.g., 'the company pay him a lot of money but who was not satisfied'). Punctuation is also problematic, with misuse of semicolons and commas. The range of structures is very limited, consisting mostly of simple sentences that are often incorrectly constructed. These errors are pervasive and significantly affect the clarity of the writing.
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.