In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas for a few years, but others think everyone should be free to choose where they work.
Discuss and give your own opinion.
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
You should write at least 250 words.
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay Sample
Sample Answer 1:
As a big gap is there between the urban and rural areas, some people opine that teachers
and doctors who are fresh out of college should work in villages for a few years. However,
others believe that the choice of where to work should be left on the teachers and doctors.
In this essay I shall discuss the merits and demerits of both approaches and finally give my
There are many advantages of having teachers and doctors work in rural areas. Firstly, the
people in the villages will have access to medical care and education which they are
deprived of normally. Secondly, it would be good for the teachers and doctors who are fresh
from university to translate their theoretical knowledge into practice. In urban areas there
already so many experienced teachers and doctors. Therefore, people would naturally not
opt for fresh ones. In a rural setting, they would gain a lot of confidence very early on in
their career. Finally, a few of these doctors and teachers may choose to live permanently in
those villages to serve humanity.
On the other hand, this compulsory policy may have some negative effects. To begin with,
we belong to a democratic country and everyone has a right to work where one pleases.
Such enforcement may result in working passively and there will be no motivation. So the
rural residents may not get appropriate treatment and service. Secondly, fewer and fewer
students would choose such majors and careers and so in the long run there would be
shortage of such professionals.
In my opinion, it would be better to have such a rule. It would be a win-win situation for
both, rural people and the professionals. It would also help to bridge the gap between the
cities and the countryside. The government can, however, make fresh teachers and doctors
want to work in the rural areas by offering higher salaries and other incentives.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, sending doctors and teachers to rural areas
would be an ideal situation but the government should offer some financial and non-
Model Answer 2:
The well-established civil facilities in cities are one of the key contributing factors to the rural-urban shift. However, people have different opinions regarding whether these inexperienced teachers and doctors should work in the rural areas. In this essay, both sides will be examined.
On one hand, educational and medical workers are able to enhance their working skills significantly compared to those who stay in cities. Because it is human nature to stimulate their potentials under a poor condition. For example, our ancestors learnt how to use fire and stone to strike beasts in the stone-age. However, one problem associated with this phenomenon is that people who have lived in the remote areas for a long period of time may have problems in reintegrating into the city lifestyle. Consequently, what would happen is that they might be unable to get used to the cut-throat competition that undermines confidence and working passion.
On the other hand, everyone should respect the fact that individuals are entitled to do anything they want. In contrast, if medical workers are sent to a distant place against their will, perhaps they could become less productive, showing a negative attitude towards career. Nevertheless, when it comes to the freedom of personal choice, people need to consider the influence of their behaviours. If all teachers opt to work in the city schools, then the education quality at the other side of the mountain would become cumbersome. Needless to say, the gap between urban and rural places would not be diminished
To conclude, I believe that young teachers and doctors should be sent to rural places for the sake of their personal prospects. However, we shall not forget that the final choice is given to them.
Model Answer 3:
Undeniably, educational institutions and specialized hospitals are located in the urban areas in almost all countries around the globe. To equalize these facilities among the citizens of a country, most of the people have the opinion that government should make regulations for compulsory rural service after the graduation by the professionals. Whereas others believe that it is an unethical interference with someone’s freedom. This essay delves both these views before arriving to a logical conclusion.
On one hand, mandatory service after graduation by health professionals and educational faculty are astonishingly beneficial to the rural people. For instance compulsory one-three years rural service for new teachers, doctors, dentists etc. will alleviate the scarcity of trained professionals in the village area. In addition, those who have qualified from the government institutions receiving grant from the government have their responsibility to serve the government and the people. Moreover, because of brain drain system community is getting very less service from the talented professionals and compulsory work in rural areas by new doctors and teachers will ensure that they concentrate more on serving people rather than planning to migrate to a rich country. Rural people have to move to city areas for better treatment and for their children’s education and this has a negative consequence like over population, increased crime rate and pollution in city areas. Adopting this strategy by the government will ensure a better distribution of population in both rural and city areas. Finally professionals like doctors and teachers should focus primarily on serving people, not to amass fortunes. Unfortunately teachers and doctors in many cases are far more concerned about money than helping people and few years’ compulsory work in rural areas at the begging of someone’s career would be a great leap toward appositive mind-setup by these professionals.
On the other hand, some others believe that in an independent country everybody should have the freedom to decide where to work and where to live. Any restriction and mandatory rules would violate their rights and would cause them to become frustrated. These professionals would then dislike to work or stay in their homeland and will try to migrate to a foreign country. Furthermore this should be spontaneous decision made by a newly became doctor and teacher and should not be a forced decision. Hence the supporters of this view argue that compulsory work in rural areas is both unfair and harmful.
Put everything into consideration, I personally feel that for a rapid and complete development of a nation both rural and city areas should get focus for facilities and development. Government should ensure the equal distribution of services and placing new doctors and teachers in rural areas for few years would be a great idea to help rural people and also to build a service oriented mentality among these young professionals.
Model Answer 4:
Admittedly, allocating medical and educational professionals can help to alleviate the current situations in remote areas to some extent. To be specific, under the guide of new doctors, not only can local people receive more advanced medical attention, but also establish community medical centers, which will benefit them even in a long run. Moreover, it is teachers who can foster the next generation. Thus, more and more specialized and knowledgeable youngsters can be cultivated, which in turn will dedicate all their techniques and knowledge to the development of their hometown.
Nevertheless, reaching the conclusion that newly arrived teachers and doctors can help to develop the rural places does not necessarily indicate that this is the best solution. In fact, such compulsory policy may trigger negative effects. For instance, some of the teachers and doctors may not want to be allocated to these remote places due to the fact that they cannot be separated from their families or they consider the living conditions there are very harsh. Under these circumstances, it would be wrong and inhuman to implement this policy. Furthermore, if these professionals were assigned against their wills, they would be reluctant to perform their jobs and would even hold resentment towards their jobs.
In addition, instead of sending new teachers and doctors, the government should improve the local infrastructures. This is the fundamental solution to tackle this problem. That is to say, without the construction of local facilities, the allocation of teachers and doctors would be neither productive nor attractive. Only after the development of local hospitals and schools, can the problem be addressed.
In conclusion, as far as I am concerned, sending professionals to rural places cannot combat the problem completely. Instead, the government should give priority to the construction of schools and hospitals, which is the essential solution.
In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas for a few years. But some others think everyone should be free to choose where they work .Discuss and give your own opinion.
In this day and age, it can be generally observed that the disparity between cities and the country has been aggravated by relentless urbanization. With respect to educational and medical facilities, a yawning gap has emerged between those in cities and the rural ones. This manifest chasm has prompted some to suggest that teachers and doctors fresh out of university work in the country for a few years.Yet many are opposed to this view on the grounds that it infringes upon individual freedom to choose where they work.Personally, I think both these two views have merit and demerit.
Granted,assigning new teachers and doctors to the countryside may create certain benefits.To begin with,this practice can help foster a strong sense of obligation in many teachers and doctors.They can experience first-hand how the rural residents are held back by the out-moded teaching and medical facilities and this, in turn, can inspire a host of professionals to commit themselves to the alleviation of this disturbing situation. Moreover,the inferior living and working conditions in the country can temper many of these young professionals’ soul.They are very likely to be more tenacious and determined and hence more successful than their urban counterparts in later careers.
However,there are even more drawbacks that this practice can engender.In the first place,many young teachers and doctors will feel unmotivated or frustrated if they are sent to rural areas against their own will.They may have a hard time getting accustomed to the shabby housing and primitive facilities and slack off at work.In the second place,if new teachers and doctors are coerced to work in the countryside, a considerable proportion of them may find it daunting when it comes time for them to relocate to cities after a few years in the country.They will feel intense occupational stress when they cannot operate efficiently equipment much more advanced than the devices they are used to back in the country school or hospital. Last but not least, given the inferiority of the rural educational and medical facilities,it is highly probable that the inexperience of new teachers and doctors will lead to unsatisfactory job performance in rural schools and clinics.We really cannot expect fresh recruits to work wonders with outdated tools.
In the final analysis,I concede that sending teachers and doctors fresh out of college to the countryside may produce specific advantages. However,if we enforce this indiscriminately,that will surely generate even more banes. On balance, I am convinced we should optimize our workforce and honor the individual freedom in determining where they work.
Submit your Essay here in the comment section, we will add your essay in our post.
(Collected; Source: Internet)