📝 Model answerBand 9320 words

Band 9 model answer

A model answer written to illustrate a Band 9 response to this question, with the rubric breakdown and what carries it. Written by us as a teaching example, not a verified exam script.

Some university students want to learn about other subjects in addition to their main subjects. Others believe it is more important to give all their time and attention to studying for a qualification. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

9

Overall

8.5

Task response

9

Coherence & cohesion

9

Lexical resource

9

Grammar

University education sits at the intersection of two competing ideals: the formation of a well-rounded mind and the efficient production of skilled graduates. Some students are drawn to sampling courses beyond their primary field, while others insist that mastery demands undivided attention. Both positions have genuine merit, though I believe a degree of breadth ultimately serves students and society alike.

The case for concentrated study is straightforward and pragmatic. In highly technical disciplines, medicine, civil engineering, software architecture, the sheer volume of specialised knowledge demands sustained, focused effort. A medical student who regularly diverts hours towards philosophy or art history risks arriving at clinical training with gaps that carry real consequences for patients. Employers and professional bodies in such fields consistently reward depth of expertise, and the competitive pressure of postgraduate applications reinforces this expectation.

Yet exclusive focus carries its own costs. Graduates who have never been invited to think across disciplinary boundaries can find themselves poorly equipped for workplaces where problems rarely respect tidy academic borders. A business analyst who has studied behavioural psychology writes more persuasive reports; an engineer who has encountered environmental ethics is likelier to flag sustainable alternatives. Beyond vocational utility, exposure to the humanities or social sciences cultivates critical thinking and empathy that narrow training tends to suppress.

My own view is that integration is the more defensible model. A sensibly designed curriculum can deliver specialisation without sacrificing breadth: a law student taking one elective in economics or a scientist auditing a course in ethics loses very little and potentially gains a great deal. The goal of university, after all, extends beyond certification; it encompasses the formation of citizens capable of navigating a complex world.

In conclusion, while the demands of certain professions justify concentrated study, a modest engagement with subjects beyond one's primary field enriches graduates and makes them more adaptable. Universities should facilitate, rather than discourage, this kind of intellectual range.

✅ What carries it
  • Both views are given equal, well-reasoned treatment before a clear personal position is stated.
  • Concrete cross-disciplinary examples, a business analyst with psychology, an engineer with ethics, give the argument practical grounding.
  • Sophisticated hedging and qualification ('sensibly designed curriculum', 'loses very little') prevents overstatement.
  • Varied sentence structures and precise collocations sustain a high formal register throughout.
⚠️ What keeps it from higher
  • The concession paragraph on specialisation could be slightly more developed to balance the space given to the breadth argument.
⚡ Your turn

Write your own. Get a real band read.

Reading a model answer only takes you so far. Write your own response to this question and we’ll grade it against the four official rubrics, the same way we scored this one.

Attempt this question