Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-13

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 5.0)

There is a highly big debate that wether high professional people should work in their home country or move to abroad. well, I firmly believe that everyone has a freedom to choose their career path according to themself because they do hardwork and give their best to their studies as well as their career .so why they should choose their life according to the people or society.

on the other hand , it is also very good thing to live in their own country to help local economy and public. but what if they didn't get what they deserve.so in that situation people must should move to another country for themselves and their loved ones.

According to our countries circumstances a well setteled person also want to move abroad for their lives so why a hardworking person are not allowed?

Restricting them would not only be unfair but could also lead to a frustrated, underperforming workforce.

Also we are very much familiar with the circumstances of our country as well as abroad. ALSO after paying a kidney touching fee to universties and such a hardwaork ,and after that they just get a few slary which they didn't deserve. so thats's why it's toatly depend on the person's choice or life.

In conclusion, while it is beneficial for the local community when professionals stay, it is unjust to force them to remain against their will. In my opinion, instead of enforcing mandatory restrictions, governments should focus on improving local working conditions and salaries to naturally incentivize talented individuals to stay and serve their homeland.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you support professionals having the freedom to choose where they work, and the conclusion offers a relevant alternative to compulsory service—improving salaries and working conditions. You also acknowledge the benefit of professionals staying to support the local community. However, the discussion of the two views is uneven: the case for staying is mentioned briefly, while the reasons for leaving are repeated rather than developed with specific explanation or an example. The question asks you to discuss both views, so explain more fully how local services or public investment might benefit from professionals staying, then compare this with their right to seek better opportunities. This would make the response more complete and its ideas better supported.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a recognisable overall shape, moving from your opinion to the opposing view and then to a conclusion. The final paragraph also returns to your central position. However, progression between ideas is not consistently clear: the opening moves quickly from personal freedom to society’s expectations, and the paragraph beginning “According to our countries circumstances” does not clearly connect its question to the following points. Linking phrases such as “on the other hand” and “Also” are used, but some transitions feel mechanical or do not show the precise relationship between ideas. Organise the body into one paragraph for each view, with a clear topic sentence and explanation, and use references such as “this concern” to connect sentences more precisely.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt vocabulary relevant to the topic, including “local economy,” “underperforming workforce,” “mandatory restrictions,” and “incentivize,” which help express your position. However, the range is limited by repeated general words such as “country,” “people,” and “choice,” while several inaccurate or informal expressions make meaning less clear. For example, “high professional people,” “kidney touching fee,” and “a few slary” are not natural choices in this context; spelling errors such as “universties” and “toatly” also affect clarity. Aim for precise terms such as “qualified professionals,” “substantial tuition fees,” and “low salaries.” Checking collocations and spelling, and varying topic vocabulary, would make your argument easier to follow.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex structures, including the conditional question “what if they didn’t get what they deserve” and the sentence beginning “Restricting them would not only be unfair.” However, the range is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to make some sentences difficult to read. Examples include “everyone has a freedom,” “according to themself,” “a hardworking person are not allowed,” and “people must should move”; these show problems with articles, agreement, pronouns, and modal verbs. Sentence boundaries and punctuation are also inconsistent, particularly where sentences begin with lowercase letters or run together after full stops. Practise building accurate sentences with one main idea, then check agreement, articles, and punctuation before adding more complex clauses.

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.