How to read the question

• This is a discussion essay: Discuss both these views and give your own opinion means each view needs its own developed paragraph, and your opinion must be clearly stated.
• The key words are required and free. The first view supports compulsion, so think about who pays for training and why a country might want to keep its graduates; the second view is about individual freedom and choice.
• The question is about professionals such as doctors and engineers, whose training is long and often publicly funded, so keep your examples to skilled professions rather than migration in general.
• Your opinion can agree with one view or take a middle position, for example that professionals should be free to leave but should repay part of the cost of their training.
• State your opinion in the introduction and the conclusion. A common structure is to discuss the view you disagree with first and the view you support second.
• Avoid turning the essay into a general discussion of immigration, or of whether rich countries should accept foreign workers, which is a different question.

Suggested position

Although I understand why some people want professionals to stay where they trained, I believe they should be free to choose where they work, provided that governments find fairer ways to recover the cost of their training.

Paragraph plan

1. 1

   Introduction

   Paraphrase both views about whether doctors, engineers and other professionals should have to work in the country that trained them, then give your opinion: they should be free to move, but the cost of training should be recovered fairly.

2. 2

   Body paragraph 1: the case for requiring them to stay

   Explain that training is expensive and often funded by the state, that a brain drain causes the home country to lose its investment, and that developing countries with short-staffed hospitals and infrastructure needs suffer most.

3. 3

   Body paragraph 2: the case for freedom

   Argue that forcing adults to stay restricts personal freedom, that people have legitimate reasons to move such as family, safety or specialist experience, that compulsion may discourage students from these careers, and that migrants often send money home or return with new skills.

4. 4

   Conclusion

   Restate that freedom of movement should be kept, and suggest practical compromises such as partial repayment of tuition costs or better pay and conditions to encourage professionals to stay.

Ideas and arguments

• Training doctors and engineers is very expensive and is often subsidised by taxpayers, who reasonably expect to benefit from it.
• A brain drain from developing countries leaves hospitals short of staff and slows infrastructure projects.
• Some countries already require newly qualified doctors to work in public hospitals or rural areas for a set period after graduating.
• Forcing adults to stay in one country is a serious restriction of personal freedom and human rights.
• People may have legitimate reasons to move abroad, such as family ties, personal safety or specialist training unavailable at home.
• Compulsion could backfire by discouraging talented students from entering these professions or encouraging them to study abroad instead.
• Professionals working overseas often send money home and may later return with valuable experience and international contacts.
• Compromises such as repaying part of tuition fees or improving pay and conditions at home could balance both views.

Band 8+ model answer

308 words · An original model answer written for ieltswrites, not an official answer. It stays in English, as in the exam.

Why this answer scores highly

Task Response

Both views are discussed in well-developed paragraphs with relevant reasons and examples, and the writer's position, freedom with fair repayment, is clear from the introduction and is extended in the conclusion.

Coherence and Cohesion

Each view has its own paragraph introduced by a clear topic sentence, and the conclusion links the two sides with a compromise, while cohesive devices such as from this perspective, on the other hand and moreover are used naturally.

Lexical Resource

Precise, topic-specific vocabulary such as subsidised university places, brain drain, compulsion, backfire and a fair return on its investment is used accurately and naturally.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

The essay uses a wide range of structures, including passive forms, relative clauses, conditional ideas with provided that and modal verbs such as could and might, with no noticeable errors.

Useful vocabulary

brain drain

the movement of highly skilled people from one country to another, usually for better pay or conditions

publicly funded

paid for by the government using taxpayers' money

subsidised

partly paid for by the government so that it costs the user less

skilled professionals

people with specialist training, such as doctors, engineers and lawyers

freedom of movement

the right to travel, live and work where one chooses

compulsory service

a period of work that people are required by law to do

restrict

limit what someone is allowed to do

return on investment

the benefit received in exchange for money spent

short-staffed

not having enough workers to do the job properly

remittances

money that people working abroad send back to their families at home

backfire

have the opposite effect to the one intended

tuition costs

the money paid for teaching at a university or college

strike a balance

find a fair position between two opposing needs

Common mistakes

• Discussing only one view in detail and mentioning the other in a single sentence, which leaves the essay unbalanced.
• Forgetting to give your own opinion, or only giving it in the final sentence without any support.
• Writing about immigration in general, for example whether countries should accept refugees, instead of professionals who trained in one country.
• Ignoring the reason behind the first view, that training is often paid for by the home country, and presenting it simply as unfair control.
• Using emotional or extreme language, such as governments should never control anyone, instead of balanced, reasoned arguments.
• Repeating doctors and engineers throughout rather than using alternatives such as skilled professionals, graduates and qualified workers.

Frequently asked questions

Which Cambridge book is this question from?

This question about whether professionals such as doctors and engineers should be required to work in the country where they trained is Writing Task 2 of Test 3 in Cambridge IELTS 17 Academic, published in 2022.

Can I take a middle position in this discuss both views essay?

Yes. A balanced opinion, such as allowing professionals to work abroad while asking them to repay part of their training costs, is acceptable as long as it is stated clearly and explained.

Where should I put my opinion?

State it briefly in the introduction and restate it in the conclusion. You can also make it clear in the body paragraph that discusses the view you agree with.

How many words should I write for this Task 2?

Write at least 250 words; about 270-310 words is usually enough to discuss both views and give your opinion in 40 minutes.