Prompt: Topic: in many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in cities. Some people think that university graduates who become new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas for a few years. To what extend do you agree or disagree?

The issue of whether students who majored in education or medicine should work in rural areas first is certainly a contentious one. Despite there are valid arguments to the contrary. I personally believe it is better for them work in cities after graduation. While working in rural areas should just be one option among other options. Ċ From my perspective, teachers and doctors should go where there is the greatest demand for them. With the current trend of rural depopulation and uncontrolled growth of cities, countryside is no longer the most urgent place that keen need teachers and doctors. Instead, some regions in cities such as suburban districts and slums (in less affluent countries particular) often have a huge demand for education sources and medical care. Rather than serving the minorities in remote areas, I feel that fresh graduates should devote themselves for the sake of the majority population in urban areas. Ċ Yet, perhaps the strongest argument in favor of young teachers and doctors working in cities is that of human rights. Even if rural dwellers have the same right to obtain high quality education and medical care as some of their counterparts have in cities, new graduates also human beings, they also have the right to determine where to live and work. Given that most young people tend to find job in cities, dispatching new teachers and doctors to work in rural areas would be a violation to their civil liberty. Ċ In conclusion, I once again reaffirm my position that fresh graduates should work in cities because they can help more people there. As choosing workplace is a human right, we should only encourage those people who willingly serve in rural areas.