Students Struggling to Focus at School

The essay addresses both questions with relevant ideas about technology-driven distraction and institutional or parental solutions, but the ideas are limited in development and the conclusion introduces new, loosely connected points.

There is a visible overall structure and some cohesive devices, but progression is often mechanical and linkages within sentences are confusing, so the reader must work to follow the message.

There is an attempt at less common vocabulary such as predicament, forge and amenities, but it is often used awkwardly or inaccurately, and wordiness and imprecise collocations recur throughout.

A mix of simple and complex structures appears, yet frequent errors in verb forms, articles and sentence construction, such as the school have and young people distract by other stuff, impede meaning at times.

Both causes and solutions are fully addressed with a clear position, relevant development, and examples, though some ideas are extended at the cost of precision.

Ideas progress logically with clear paragraphing and appropriate cohesive devices, though a few connections and the closing chain of consequences are slightly overextended.

Vocabulary is flexible and mostly precise with some less common items, but redundancy such as the repeated 'career prospects' phrase reduces overall precision.

A variety of complex structures is used with generally good control, and errors are minor and non-impeding.

The response addresses both parts of the question with a clear main cause, developed solutions, and a summarising conclusion, though some ideas remain broadly rather than fully extended.

Ideas progress logically across clear paragraphs with effective cohesive devices and referencing, with only occasional slightly mechanical linkages.

Vocabulary shows good range and flexibility for the topic, using terms such as attention spans, enforcement, and conditioning, with a few less precise collocations.

Grammar is consistently accurate and varied, employing complex structures, relative clauses, and participial phrases with only rare, non-impeding errors.

Both the causes of students' inattention and possible solutions are clearly addressed with relevant, developed ideas and concrete examples, though some support remains somewhat general.

Ideas progress logically through clear paragraph divisions and cohesive devices, although linking is at times mechanical and the conclusion refers vaguely to earlier factors and measures instead of synthesising them.

A sufficient range of topic-related vocabulary is used with some flexibility, despite occasional inaccuracy such as 'everyday' for 'every day' and slight awkwardness in collocations.

A variety of complex structures is produced with generally good control. Minor punctuation-spacing errors occur, but they rarely impede meaning.

The response addresses both questions directly, presents relevant causes (sleep deprivation, technology, learning disabilities) and solutions, and develops each with explanation, though support is somewhat general rather than extended or example-driven.

Ideas progress logically across clearly separated paragraphs with effective linking devices and a cohesive introduction and conclusion, though transitions are at times slightly mechanical.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise for the topic, with natural collocations such as sleep deprivation, academic performance, and undiagnosed learning disabilities, with only minimal imprecision.

A wide range of sentence structures is used with generally good control, including complex forms and relative clauses; errors are few and do not impede communication.

The response addresses both questions directly with a clear position, relevant causes and solutions, and a consistent conclusion, though development of each idea remains somewhat general rather than fully extended.

Ideas progress logically across clear paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices used naturally, though some referencing and transitions are occasionally mechanical.

Vocabulary is wide, precise, and natural, with idiomatic academic phrasing such as attentional stamina, obsolete pedagogical practices, and kindle their interest, and only minimal inaccuracy.

A variety of complex structures are used with flexibility and generally good control, with only occasional errors or awkward constructions that do not impede communication.

The response directly addresses both questions with a clear position, developed ideas, and relevant support including an example of phone confiscation in Asian schools, with a tangential final remark on government regulation.

Ideas progress logically across well-managed paragraphs, and cohesive devices are used naturally, with only occasional slightly forced linkage such as the dense causal chain in the second body paragraph.

Vocabulary is flexible and largely precise, with natural phrases like predatory consumer electronics companies and mitigate the issue, though a few collocations are slightly imprecise.

A wide range of complex structures is used with good control, but slips such as “it is has become”, the shared complement after “approve or purchase”, and the dangling “By waiting” phrase reduce accuracy.

The response directly answers both questions, presents clear and relevant causes and solutions, and develops each idea with plausible explanation throughout.

Ideas are organised logically across clear paragraphs with effective cohesive devices and a smooth, well-managed progression from causes to solutions.

A wide and precise range of academic vocabulary, including natural collocations such as instantly gratifying and holistic assessment, is used with only rare lapses.

Relative clauses, content clauses and other complex structures show generally strong control. Some sentences contain several layers of explanation and could be easier to parse. The clause after 'Another possible explanation is' expresses the explanation's content; it is not a relative-clause agreement error.