High Salaries of Sports Professionals vs Other Jobs

Both views are addressed with relevant developed examples, but the response mainly explains why the pay gap exists and the opinion in the conclusion does not directly resolve whether high sports salaries are justified or unfair.

Ideas are arranged in clear paragraphs with a generally logical progression, though cohesion is somewhat mechanical and some links between ideas are loosely connected.

Vocabulary is adequate for the topic with some appropriate collocations, but there are noticeable slips and imprecise choices such as 'sport starts', 'ample amount of money', and 'mercenary brands'.

A mix of simple and complex structures is used, but frequent errors in agreement, verb forms, and article use, for example 'the main reason... are not paid', 'has became', and 'more that those', reduce accuracy.

Both views are addressed and a clear position is presented with relevant supporting reasons, though some ideas are only briefly developed and phrasing occasionally obscures the argument.

The essay has a logical paragraph structure covering both sides and a conclusion, but cohesion devices are often mechanical or formulaic, such as 'First reason:' and 'The second reason:'.

Vocabulary is adequate for the topic with some appropriate collocations, but there are noticeable awkward or inaccurate expressions like 'unjustified this' and 'Hard worker deserve high wages'.

A range of structures is attempted, including conditionals and relative ideas, but errors in agreement, articles, and sentence construction are frequent though rarely obscure meaning entirely.

Both views are addressed and a clear personal position is given in the conclusion, but the development of each argument remains somewhat limited and the support is general rather than fully extended.

The response is organised into logical paragraphs with an introduction, two body sections, and a conclusion, though some sentences link mechanically and the closing sentence contains a confusing construction.

There is an adequate range of vocabulary with some appropriate collocations such as 'sparked a heated debate' and 'boost their brand value', but expressions are occasionally imprecise or awkward, as in 'borned with a natural gift'.

A mix of sentence structures is attempted, but errors are frequent, including agreement mistakes ('who has just borned', 'society do not reward'), missing articles, and faulty clause construction, though the meaning is mostly recoverable.

The response addresses all parts of the task, presenting both views and a clear opinion, though the fairness argument receives slightly less development and the conclusion is compact.

Ideas progress logically across clear paragraphs with effective linking devices such as 'On the other hand' and 'Therefore', with only mildly mechanical transitions.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, including phrases like 'exorbitant wages' and 'share of the profits', with occasional informal choices such as 'pro sports'.

A range of complex structures is used with generally good control, and errors such as subject-verb disagreement in 'large sums... is justified' are minor and non-impeding.

The response fully addresses the task, discusses both views clearly, and presents a well-developed, extended position with relevant supporting ideas.

Paragraphing is logical and cohesion is seamless, with a natural progression of ideas skilfully managed throughout.

Vocabulary is wide and used with full flexibility and precision, including natural collocations such as extravagant lifestyles, recognition of skills, and out of the spotlight.

Grammar shows a full range of complex structures used with flexibility and accuracy, with errors so rare they barely exist.