接受糟糕处境还是努力改善

Both perspectives are addressed and a clear personal position is presented, but ideas are developed unevenly and examples remain somewhat general rather than fully extended.

The essay is clearly paragraphed and progresses through both views to a conclusion, yet cohesion is at times mechanical and the logical link between some ideas is loose.

A wide and often precise range of vocabulary is used with some flexibility, though certain collocations and word choices are unnatural or forced.

The essay attempts varied structures, including comparative clauses and not only inversion. Errors include the standalone Because clause, “when ones are”, and a subject mismatch in “it may ... acquire some skills”, which reduce accuracy and clarity.

The response addresses all parts of the task, discussing both perspectives and presenting a clear, consistent personal position developed with relevant explanation and examples.

Ideas are arranged logically with clear paragraphing, though repetition of life and battle imagery and the imprecise transition “On the contrary” occasionally weaken cohesion.

Vocabulary is adequate for the task with some attempt at less common items, but noticeable awkward collocations like 'win the adversity of life' and imprecise word choices reduce precision.

A range of structures, including conditionals and inversion, is used with reasonable flexibility, and errors are generally minor and non-impeding.

The response addresses both views and gives a consistent opinion with relevant examples, but ideas are unevenly developed and the opposing view is treated somewhat superficially, fitting between Band 6 and Band 7.

Progression is broadly clear with logical paragraphing and cohesive devices, though some transitions are mechanical and the line of reasoning occasionally jumps, consistent with Band 6.5.

The response demonstrates a good range of less common vocabulary used with awareness of style and collocation, with occasional awkward or imprecise choices that do not impede meaning.

A variety of complex structures, including conditionals and relative clauses, is used with generally good control. More consistent number choices and parallel verb forms would make some sentences smoother.

Both views are addressed with extended, relevant support and a consistent opinion, though the first view's development relies on a single marriage example and some slightly generalized reasoning.

Ideas progress logically across clear paragraphs with effective linking devices, with only minor mechanical sequencing such as formulaic connectors.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible for precise meaning, including phrases like 'in jeopardy' and 'destructive emotions', though repetition of 'situations' and a few awkward collocations reduce precision.

A range of complex structures, including conditionals and relative clauses, is used with generally good control, with occasional errors and wordiness that do not impede communication.

The essay addresses both parts of the discussion, develops each view with relevant examples, and states a clear opinion, though some ideas remain somewhat extended rather than deepened.

Progression is logical with clear paragraphing and cohesive devices, but linking is occasionally mechanical and some transitions are formulaic.

Vocabulary shows flexibility and some less common items such as brooding, regain their sanity, and does not hold water, though occasional imprecision like view/perspective appears.

A range of complex structures is used with generally good control, and errors such as this essay discussed that are minor and do not impede meaning.

The response addresses all parts of the task, presents a clear position throughout, and supports main ideas with relevant examples, though the first view is developed less fully than the second.

Ideas are logically organised with clear paragraphing, cohesive devices, and a progression that is easy to follow across the whole response.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with natural collocations such as 'fosters self-confidence', 'unavoidable limitations', and 'practising gratitude', and only occasional less idiomatic phrasing.

A wide range of complex structures is used with flexibility and accuracy, with errors rare and generally not impeding communication.

Both attitudes are discussed and the writer clearly favours overcoming adversity. However, the acceptance discussion mainly criticises its supporters, while some historical examples need a clearer explanation of how deliberate effort produced beneficial change.

Ideas progress logically across well-structured paragraphs with varied cohesive devices, though some linking and referencing is slightly mechanical or forced.

A wide range of vocabulary is used with generally good control, but some idioms and ambitious word choices are imprecise or stylistically misjudged.

A variety of complex sentence structures is handled flexibly with frequent error-free sentences, and minor errors do not impede understanding.

Both views are discussed with developed explanations and examples, and a clear, consistently supported personal opinion is presented throughout.

Ideas progress logically across well-managed paragraphs with appropriate cohesive devices, though the conclusion repeats earlier wording rather than adding new synthesis.

Vocabulary is generally flexible and precise, with topic-appropriate items like complacency and resilience, but occasional awkward or inaccurate collocations appear.

A variety of complex structures are used with good control, and errors are minor and rarely impede understanding.

Both views are addressed and a clear, consistent opinion is supported by relevant examples. Practical reasons for acceptance are explained, but the response could connect its counterargument more closely to those constraints and better support its universal concluding claim.

Ideas progress logically across well-organized paragraphs with effective linking devices and a clear overall stance maintained throughout.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with natural expressions such as “put up with”, “retraining” and “make a real difference”. The nonstandard spelling “payscale” is a minor lexical lapse.

A wide range of structures is used with strong flexibility and control, including concessive clauses and complex sentences, with only occasional minor errors.