Band 7.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-09-16

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 7.5)

It is often argued that professionals such as doctors and engineers, having been trained at their home country's expense, should be obliged to remain and work there. Others contend that qualified individuals should have the freedom to pursue employment wherever they choose. This essay will examine both perspectives before presenting my own view.

Those who support mandatory local employment usually point to the public investment involved in training such professionals. Medical and engineering education is heavily subsidised by governments in many countries, and when newly qualified graduates emigrate immediately afterwards, the state effectively loses its investment while the receiving country benefits without contributing to the training costs. This is particularly damaging in developing nations, where a shortage of doctors and engineers can have serious consequences for healthcare and infrastructure. Requiring a period of domestic service, proponents argue, ensures that the society which funded the training also reaps its rewards.

On the other hand, advocates of professional freedom emphasise individual rights and the realities of a globalised economy. Restricting where a person may work resembles a form of forced labour and could discourage talented individuals from entering these fields altogether. Furthermore, professionals who work abroad often send remittances home, gain valuable international experience, and may eventually return with enhanced skills, benefiting their home country indirectly.

In my opinion, a balanced approach is preferable to an outright mandate. Rather than legally compelling professionals to stay, governments could offer incentives, such as loan forgiveness or higher salaries, in exchange for a few years of domestic service, while still respecting the right to relocate afterwards. This approach protects public investment without infringing on personal liberty.

In conclusion, although the state's financial interest in retaining trained professionals is understandable, individual freedom of movement should ultimately take precedence, supported by well-designed incentive schemes rather than compulsion.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 7.5

The response fully addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views on whether professionals should work in their training country and providing a clear, well-reasoned personal opinion. In the second paragraph, the student thoroughly examines the argument regarding public investment and brain drain in developing nations, citing specific examples such as doctors and engineers. The third paragraph effectively explores the counter-argument concerning individual rights and global economic realities. Furthermore, the fourth paragraph presents a nuanced personal stance that balances state interests with personal freedom. The position is maintained consistently throughout the essay, and ideas are fully developed and extended with relevant explanations, fitting the criteria for Band 8 well.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 7.5

Coherence and cohesion are managed to a high standard throughout the essay. The response is logically sequenced, moving smoothly from a clear introduction outlining the structure, to balanced body paragraphs discussing each viewpoint, and finally to a well-considered conclusion. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct central theme. Cohesive devices are employed flexibly and naturally, such as 'Those who support', 'On the other hand', 'In my opinion', and 'In conclusion'. Referencing is clear and precise, ensuring that the reader can follow the progression of arguments effortlessly. The overall logical flow satisfies the requirements for a Band 8 score.

Lexical Resource — Band 7.5

The writer demonstrates a wide and flexible lexical resource that is well-suited to an academic discussion. Less common vocabulary items and collocations are used skillfully throughout the text, including phrases such as 'heavily subsidised by governments', 'brain drain', 'personal liberty', and 'incentive schemes'. Word choice is generally precise and natural, as seen in expressions like 'outright mandate' and 'remittances home'. There are only occasional minor limitations or slips, which do not impede communication at all. The vocabulary range allows the writer to convey precise shades of meaning, aligning comfortably with the Band 7.5 to 8.0 level.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 7.5

The essay displays a wide range of complex sentence structures used with a high degree of accuracy. The writer incorporates conditional forms, participial phrases ('having been trained at their home country's expense'), and varied relative clauses naturally. The majority of sentences are error-free, and punctuation is handled competently throughout. Although there are very rare minor slips or awkward structural moments, they do not disrupt the flow of reading or obscure meaning. The level of grammatical control and the variety of structures robustly support a Band 8 score.

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.