Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-09-13

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 6.0)

There is an ongoing debate where some people favour that highly qualified professionals should work for the nation that provided them the education, while others oppose by saying that they should have the freedom to work any country they desire. This essay will discuss both the above mentioned views and give my personal opinion in the subsequent paragraphs.

On the one hand, working for the land that provided all the necessary education should be counted as a national duty. By this I mean that, national authorities offer many scholarships for students studying in medical or engineering fields to assist them with the expensive course fees. So, if government has helped them to complete their degree, individuals should be working for the well-being of their homeland. By doing so they can return the favour and as a result nation's currency will stay there only. In addition, knowledge provided by universities differ from place-to-place, so it might get difficult to understand and fit in foreign workspace.

On the other hand, there are individuals who prefer to get employment abroad because they want to explore the environment and workplace of other destinations. Furthermore, foreign nations offer significantly high salaries to doctors and engineers with better infrastructure. Moreover, by migrating to some other province they learn techniques and methods that is practiced there which can be different form their motherland. Also, this gives opportunity to bulid relations with other culture and grow contacts that can prove to be helpful in solving internal political disputes.

To conclude, from my way of thinking, though it is true that a person is free of their will to work at a place of their choice but he/she should never forget their motherland and contribute for it some way.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response successfully addresses all parts of the prompt by discussing both views—that professionals should work in their training country and that they should have freedom of movement—while also clearly stating a personal opinion in the introduction and conclusion. Ideas are extended and supported with relevant arguments, such as government-funded education, returning favors to the nation, better salaries abroad, and skill acquisition. For example, the student explains how scholarships justify working locally and details why foreign migration helps individuals learn new techniques and build international relations. Although some arguments could be explored with even greater depth, the response meets all the core requirements of Task 2. There is a clear position maintained throughout the essay. Therefore, this performance comfortably satisfies the criteria for a Band 6.5, leaning towards Band 7 given the thorough coverage of both perspectives.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay displays a clear overall progression and logical organization. It is divided into four paragraphs, with an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting opposing views, and a concluding paragraph. Cohesive devices are employed to connect ideas, such as 'On the one hand', 'On the other hand', 'In addition', and 'To conclude'. However, some of the referencing and cohesive links are slightly mechanical or awkward, such as 'stay there only' and 'by migrating to some other province' (referring to countries as provinces). Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate distinct viewpoints. While referencing is generally clear, occasional slips in logical transition prevent the essay from reaching a higher band. Overall, the structural framework is coherent, and the reader can easily follow the progression of arguments from beginning to end.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully attempting less common items such as 'ongoing debate', 'highly qualified professionals', 'infrastructure', and 'political disputes'. However, there are noticeable word choice and collocation inaccuracies throughout the text. For instance, the phrase 'favour that highly qualified professionals should work' is awkward, and 'bulid relations' contains a spelling error. Additionally, using 'province' to mean 'country' is an inappropriate lexical choice. Despite these limitations, the vocabulary is sufficient to convey the intended meaning clearly without impeding communication, allowing the reader to understand all main points easily. More precise collocations and polished phrasing would be required to achieve a higher band score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating attempts at subordination and relative clauses, such as 'There is an ongoing debate where some people favour...' and 'So, if government has helped them...'. However, grammatical errors and awkward phrasing are present throughout the text. Examples include missing articles ('if government has helped them', 'contribute for it'), subject-verb agreement issues ('methods that is practiced'), and minor punctuation or prepositions errors ('differ from place-to-place'). Despite these recurring flaws, the structures do not impede communication, and the meaning remains clear. The student shows adequate control over basic sentence construction, but the frequency and nature of the errors place this performance firmly within the Band 6 descriptor.

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.