Discussion Essay Model Answer
Question
Some people think that governments should provide free university education for all citizens. Others argue that students themselves should pay for their university tuition. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Full Essay
Band 7.5 annotated answer
Each paragraph is followed by an examiner note explaining exactly what earns marks.
Introduction
The question of who should bear the cost of higher education — the state or the individual — divides policymakers and the public in equal measure. While there is a strong case for publicly funded universities on grounds of social equality, I believe a system in which students contribute to their tuition fees, supported by accessible loans and grants, represents the most equitable and sustainable model.
Both views are acknowledged and own opinion is stated from the outset — as required for this essay type. The thesis is nuanced (a hybrid model) rather than simply siding with one view, which signals the sophisticated argument developed in the body. Note: the opinion is in the introduction, not saved for the conclusion.
Body Paragraph 1
Advocates of government-funded higher education argue that financial barriers prevent talented individuals from lower-income backgrounds from accessing university, thereby entrenching inequality. If tuition is free, university attendance becomes a function of academic ability rather than economic circumstance, producing a more diverse graduate workforce. Nordic countries such as Finland and Denmark have demonstrated that universal free tertiary education is achievable, and both nations consistently produce highly skilled, internationally competitive graduates. From this perspective, the cost to the state is an investment in human capital that generates long-term economic returns through taxation.
The first view is presented fairly and developed in full — not dismissed or weakened. Real country examples (Finland, Denmark) support the argument with credibility. 'Investment in human capital' is sophisticated economic framing that earns Lexical Resource marks. This is what 'discuss both views fairly' requires.
Body Paragraph 2
Those who favour student-funded tuition contend that graduates, who typically earn significantly more over a lifetime than non-graduates, are best placed to contribute to the cost of their education. I find this argument compelling in part: expecting some financial contribution from students encourages personal investment in their studies and ensures universities compete for enrolment on the basis of quality. However, outright unsubsidised fees risk deterring the most able students from modest backgrounds — the very outcome proponents of free education warn against. A hybrid model combining income-contingent repayment loans with targeted grants for lower-income students addresses both concerns.
The second view is explained and partially endorsed before being qualified — this integration of own opinion into Body 2 is exactly what the question requires. 'Income-contingent repayment loans' is a precise, less-common term that demonstrates genuine Lexical Resource. The paragraph resolves the tension between the two views rather than just listing them.
Conclusion
In summary, both sides of this debate raise legitimate points. I believe the strongest solution lies not at either extreme but in a carefully designed mixed model that makes higher education genuinely accessible to all while maintaining institutional accountability and fiscal sustainability.
The conclusion does not introduce new ideas and accurately reflects the nuanced position developed throughout. 'Fiscal sustainability' is strong Band 7+ vocabulary. Crucially, the own opinion is consistent with what was stated in the introduction — an error that costs marks when the conclusion contradicts the thesis.
Comparison
Band 6 vs Band 7+ introduction
✗ Band 6
“There are two different views about university education. Some people think it should be free and others think students should pay. In this essay, I will discuss both sides and give my own opinion.”
✓ Band 7+
“The question of who should bear the cost of higher education — the state or the individual — divides policymakers and the public in equal measure. While there is a strong case for publicly funded universities on grounds of social equality, I believe a system in which students contribute to their tuition fees, supported by accessible loans and grants, represents the most equitable and sustainable model.”
What makes the difference
The Band 6 introduction restates the question in simpler vocabulary and announces a mechanical essay plan ('I will discuss both sides'). It adds no analytical value. The Band 7+ paraphrases meaningfully, signals the complexity of the issue, and opens with a thesis that hints at the nuanced hybrid position argued in the body.
Why it scores Band 7.5
Key strengths of this essay
Own opinion stated in the introduction, consistent throughout, and restated in the conclusion
Both views presented fairly with real country evidence (Finland, Denmark)
Own view integrated into Body 2 rather than left entirely to the conclusion
Precise academic vocabulary: 'entrenching inequality', 'human capital', 'income-contingent repayment', 'fiscal sustainability'
Other Task 2 model answers