Question: Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required ...
Marking Generated by Free AI Models
You are on the free tier, which uses free AI models. They can occasionally be slow, unstable, or temporarily unavailable. Balang Plus uses premium models for faster, more reliable, and higher-quality marking.
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.
In the contemporary era, the phenomenon of migration of professionals has witnessed an unprecedented surge. There are varying views on thatwhether professionals should not be free to work wherever they want, and many believe they should be in the service of the location that traintrained them. I argue that the negative consequences of forcing professionals to stay in the country where they have studied, particularly in terms of personal choices and social impacts, far outweigh the benefits, making it a detrimental approach.On the one hand, many proponents of mandatory work placeplacement claim that a vast amount of money should be isspent until professionals become expertexperts, and this money is often provideprovided by individuals taxindividual taxes. Therefore, professionals have a huge responsibility to work for the people that make them unable to studywho made their studies possible. Furthermore, they assert that professionals usually opt for developed countries provided that they have the right to choose the country owing to better work conditionconditions. As a result, poor countries that preparetrain experts cannot use thebenefit from their knowledge of them, and they cannot progress.On the other hand, numerous proponents contend that imposing such requirements infringes on the professionals' autonomy to make independent choices. They advocate instead for an approach that presents both sides of the debate, empowering professionals to make a informed and voluntary decisions rather than obligating them to choose one side. A poignant example can be found in a survey conducted in Iran, which revealed that obligating experts who studied a lot extensivelyand have a strong credentials to stay in the country is an overly simplistic approach that can be effectiveineffective. Moreover, a growing numberbody of research has shown, as that if professionals are not be free to choose freely, they cannot work properly, resulting in decreasing usefuldecreased productive hours of work.In conclusion, while many declareargue that professionals such as doctors and engineers, should be work in the country where they learnlearned to be expertexperts, many opine they should be free to make decision decidewhere they want to work. I firmly believe that they should be free to choose.
While we are confident in our score estimation, you are not guaranteed to receive the same score in an official test.
Feedback on Your Essay:
Task Achievement:
Your essay addresses both sides of the argument and presents a clear opinion, which is good. However, the introduction could be more concise and directly state the two opposing views before presenting your stance.
Some arguments lack depth and clarity. For example, the claim about professionals being obligated to work in their home country due to taxpayer funding is not fully developed. Providing more specific examples or data would strengthen your points.
The conclusion is somewhat repetitive and could better summarize the key points discussed in the body paragraphs.
Coherence and Cohesion:
The essay has a logical structure, but some sentences are awkwardly phrased, making them hard to follow (e.g., "this money often provide by individuals tax"). Work on smoother transitions between ideas.
The second body paragraph shifts abruptly from discussing mandatory work requirements to personal autonomy without a clear link. A stronger topic sentence would help.
Some phrases are redundant (e.g., "make a informed and voluntary decisions"). Proofreading for grammar and word choice would improve clarity.
Lexical Resource:
There are several grammatical errors and awkward word choices (e.g., "make them unable to study," "a survey conducted in Iran, which revealed that obligating experts who studied a lot and have a strong credentials"). These affect readability.
Some vocabulary is used incorrectly (e.g., "proponents contend that imposing such requirements infringes on the professionals' autonomy" is correct, but later phrasing is less precise). Aim for more natural and accurate word usage.
Avoid informal phrasing like "a lot" in academic writing.
Grammar and Accuracy:
Multiple grammatical errors appear throughout (subject-verb agreement, article usage, tense consistency). For example:
"this money often provide by individuals tax" → "this money is often provided by taxpayers."
"make a informed and voluntary decisions" → "make informed and voluntary decisions."
"obligating experts who studied a lot and have a strong credentials" → "obligating experts who have studied extensively and possess strong credentials."
Proofreading and editing would significantly improve the essay's accuracy.
Suggestions for Improvement:
Clarify your introduction by briefly outlining both views before stating your opinion.
Develop arguments more thoroughly with specific examples or data (e.g., mention a country experiencing brain drain or cite a study).
Improve coherence by using clearer topic sentences and transitions between paragraphs.
Proofread carefully to fix grammatical errors and awkward phrasing.
Expand your conclusion to summarize key points rather than restating the introduction.
Overall, your essay shows a good understanding of the topic, but refining clarity, grammar, and argument depth would make it stronger. Keep practicing!