Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-18

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)

It is often argued that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should work in their native country because the major portion of cost of professional trainings are covered by government while others believe that they should be allowed to work in other countries as it can boost the local economy. However, in this essay both the views will be discussed followed by my own opinion in order to reach a conclusion.

Proponents of the first idea believe that professional qualifications are often costly to pursue and it is hard for many students to bear that cost personally. In order to facilitate students, government introduce different subsidy scheme and scholarships to facilitate such students. So it's the moral responsibility of these professionals to serve their country by working for the welfare and betterment of society. For instance, the government of Pakistan released their annual expenditure on different sectors in 2015 which suggested that students of government medical colleges only had to pay 20% of their actual tuition and training fee while remaining was covered by government. These statistics favour the argument that professionals should serve their country.

However, opponents of the idea that proessionals should be restricted to work in the same country where they did their training argue that allowing them to work in other countries would eventually boost the economy. Working of professionals in other countries would help the country not only in the form of foreign remmitance but also by availability of more vacant vaccancies for fresh graduates. Allowing the professionals to move abroad will create more entry level jobs in the country which will eventually help to reduce unemployement.

I personally believe that no one should be restricted to work in a particular region because doing so will eventually increase the government expenditure since government would have to pay them from it's own fund which will eventually put ressure on reserves of the economy.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You address both views and state a clear opinion: you oppose restricting professionals to the country where they trained. The discussion of public funding is relevant and supported with the Pakistan example, while the argument for freedom of movement includes remittances and vacancies for graduates. However, these points are not developed equally. The second view would benefit from a specific example or explanation of how remittances strengthen the economy, and your own position is supported mainly by the claim that restrictions would increase government expenditure. Explain why this would happen and connect it more directly to the choice professionals should have. The conclusion is also brief, so a fuller synthesis of the two arguments would make the response more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, a paragraph for each view, and a final paragraph giving your opinion. Transitions such as “However” and “For instance” help readers follow the progression, and the main ideas are generally presented in a logical order. This meets the lower-band expectations securely and shows some features of stronger organisation. To improve further, make the links between claims more explicit: the move from professionals working abroad to more vacancies for graduates needs a clearer explanation. The final paragraph also feels abrupt after the discussion, and the introduction’s promise to “reach a conclusion” is not followed by a developed concluding summary. More precise referencing and smoother links between sentences would strengthen cohesion.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “professional qualifications,” “subsidy scheme,” “foreign remittance,” and “entry level jobs,” so the main ideas are communicated. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “welfare and betterment of society.” However, spelling and word-choice errors are noticeable, including “proessionals,” “remmitance,” “vaccancies,” “unemployement,” and “ressure.” Some combinations are also unnatural, such as “the major portion of cost” and “released their annual expenditure.” These errors reduce precision and make the vocabulary less controlled. Proofread spelling carefully and choose more natural collocations; for example, say “a large share of the cost” and “published its annual expenditure.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including a subordinate clause in “because the major portion of cost … are covered by government” and a longer example introduced by “For instance.” The overall meaning remains understandable, but some grammatical errors occur across the response. For example, “government introduce” needs subject–verb agreement, while “the remaining was covered” has an incorrect structure and would be clearer as “the remainder was covered.” In “since government would have to pay them from it’s own fund,” the article and possessive form need correction. Several sentences also carry multiple ideas joined with “which will eventually,” making the structure cumbersome. Review agreement, articles, and sentence boundaries, while retaining a mix of complex and simple sentences.

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.