Question: Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required ...

Click on red question marks (?) to see an explanation for each change. Some changes are only suggestions and don't mean the original is necessarily wrong.
Some argue that legislation should oblige professionals to work within the country in which they received their training, while others assert that they should not be limitedrestricted. Although I acknowledge the concerns of the former group, I gravitate toward the latter statement. Working in a country where one is educated can be beneficial for both individuals and the society at large. First and foremost, a significant portion of individuals' studies are funded by taxpayers; therefore, thereby citizens have the right to benefit from doctors' and engineers' services. By limiting expertiseprofessional choices for the workplace, governments can ensure that people within the society profit from good services and are willing to contribute to the taxation programme. Moreover, university curricula differ from one country to the otheranother, as they have been planned based on indigenous needs. For instance, pharmacists in China have to learn tai chi and acupuncture methods, practisespractices that are neither taught nor used in other parts of the world. These studies necessitate professional settings to only hire individuals who have graduated from local universities. However, these statements can be observedviewed from another perspective. Confining expertise within the borders of a country is inhumane. The notion that suggests we should limit expertiseprofessional choices is against democratic law. All people pay taxes, and yet no one can demand one change their residential status based on taxpayers' interest interests. Therefore, the disparity between professionals' choices and other groups not only disproves human rights but also dissuades individuals from obtaining higher degrees. Additionally, in developed countries, almost half of universities' seats are allocated to immigrants who wish to obtain their degrees and go back return to serve their own country. Requiring these people to stay can bring about further problems. Firstly, if one forces others to work against their will, they will not be able to provide optimal guidance or make the finestbest product. Secondly, providing housing and other requirednecessary amenities for these graduates is demanding and can place an undue burden on the governmentsgovernment's shoulders. In conclusion, hiring graduates from local universities, although beneficial if become it becomes an obligation, can cause irreparabaleirreparable ramifications.
See more samples for this topic
Check your essay for this topic
Overall Band Score
7
Overview
Vocabulary Range
Loading
Linking Words
Loading
Spelling
Loading
Grammar Accuracy
Loading
Grammar Range
Loading
Cohesion
Loading
Paragraph Structure
Loading
Task Response
Loading
Word Count
sufficient
While we are confident in our score estimation, you are not guaranteed to receive the same score in an official test.

Feedback

Task Achievement

  • Response to the Prompt: The essay addresses both views as required by the prompt and provides a clear opinion. However, the conclusion could be more explicit in summarizing the main points discussed in the essay.
  • Position: Your position is clear, as you lean towards allowing professionals the freedom to work in any country they choose. This is well-articulated in the introduction and supported throughout the essay.

Coherence and Cohesion

  • Organization: The essay is well-organized with a clear introduction, body paragraphs discussing both views, and a conclusion. Each paragraph has a clear central idea.
  • Cohesion: Transition words and phrases such as "first and foremost," "moreover," "however," and "in conclusion" are used effectively to guide the reader through the argument. However, the transition between the second and third paragraphs could be smoother to enhance the flow of ideas.

Lexical Resource

  • Vocabulary: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, with terms like "oblige," "indigenous needs," "inhumane," and "irreparable ramifications." This variety helps convey precise meanings.
  • Word Choice: Some word choices could be improved for clarity. For example, "expertise choices" might be better expressed as "career choices" or "employment options."

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

  • Sentence Structure: The essay uses a variety of sentence structures, which adds to the readability and engagement of the text.
  • Grammar and Punctuation: There are minor grammatical errors, such as "if become an obligation" which should be "if it becomes an obligation." Additionally, "taxpayers interest" should be "taxpayers' interest." These errors do not significantly impede understanding but should be corrected for accuracy.

Suggestions for Improvement

  1. Conclusion: Strengthen the conclusion by summarizing the key points from both perspectives before restating your opinion.
  2. Transitions: Improve the transition between the second and third paragraphs to enhance the logical flow of ideas.
  3. Grammar and Punctuation: Pay attention to minor grammatical errors and punctuation to improve accuracy.

Overall, the essay effectively discusses both views and presents a clear opinion, supported by relevant arguments. With minor improvements in coherence and grammatical accuracy, the response would be even stronger.