孩子每天花数小时玩智能手机

The response addresses both questions with a clear position and relevant ideas, but development is thin and supported by weak or implausible examples, such as the claim that a colleague became blind from phone use.

Progression is broadly clear across paragraphs, but cohesion is mechanical, with formulaic framing, abrupt transitions, and sentences loosely linked, such as the unprompted policy suggestion in the third paragraph.

Vocabulary is adequate for the task, with some appropriate collocations, but it is repetitive (phone use, eyes glued, relax stress) and occasionally imprecise, such as 'a long duration of their time'.

A mix of simple and complex structures is attempted, but errors are frequent, including faulty parallelism, dangling constructions, and agreement problems, though the meaning is mostly recoverable.

Both questions are addressed with a clear negative position and relevant reasons, but main ideas remain somewhat undeveloped and conclusions about harm are asserted rather than fully extended.

Progression is broadly clear with logical paragraphing and linking devices, though cohesion is at times mechanical and ideas are repeated across paragraphs rather than advanced.

Vocabulary is adequate for the topic with some appropriate collocations such as sense of belonging and inappropriate content, but range is limited and phrasing is occasionally imprecise, as in perceived as positive on the ground.

Sentence structures show a mix of simple and complex forms with reasonable accuracy, but coordination is often faulty, including comma splices such as chat, and share photos and videos, and this gives, and variety is limited.

The response addresses both questions with a clear negative position, develops main ideas about parental preoccupation and mental health, and supports them with examples, though the evidence is somewhat questionable.

Ideas progress logically across well-managed paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices, though linking is at times mechanical, as in the formulaic opening and closing sentences.

There is a wide vocabulary range with attempts at less common items such as 'ramifications', 'deleterious', and 'offspring', but several collocations are awkward or unnatural.

A variety of complex structures, including conditionals and relative clauses, is used with generally good control, though some constructions are faulty or strained, such as 'use smartphones on a wide range' and 'busy caretakers might lead'.

The response addresses both parts of the task, presents a clear positive position in the introduction and conclusion, and develops main ideas with relevant explanation and examples.

The essay is logically organized with clear paragraphing and cohesive devices, though progression is somewhat mechanical at points with formulaic linking like 'Firstly' and 'Secondly'.

There is a sufficient range of vocabulary with some precision and flexibility, including phrases like 'fosters cognitive development' and 'reducing feelings of isolation', alongside occasional mild repetition such as repeated uses of 'enhance'.

A variety of complex structures, including relative clauses and concession, is used with good control, and error-free sentences are frequent.

The response addresses both questions fully, presents a clear negative position, and develops two plausible causes and two well-explained negative effects with relevant detail.

Ideas progress logically within clearly structured paragraphs, with cohesive devices such as 'As a result' and 'More concerning' used naturally, though referencing is occasionally repetitive.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with effective collocations like 'inordinate amount of time', 'sedentary lifestyle', and 'mental wellbeing', despite minor informal choices such as 'extra-curriculars'.

A variety of complex structures is used with generally good control, though errors like 'Changes in the education system is' and some awkward article or singular use recur.

The response fully addresses both questions, presents a clear negative position, and develops main ideas with relevant explanation, though support occasionally relies on generalisation rather than concrete development.

Paragraphing is logical with a clear progression from causes to consequences to position, aided by varied cohesive devices, although some linking and repetition of ideas is slightly mechanical.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with natural collocations such as 'detrimental effects', 'sedentary behaviour', and 'the allure of constant social interaction', with only minor occasional awkwardness.

A wide range of complex structures is used with generally good control, including relative clauses and participle phrases, with only occasional minor errors that do not impede meaning.

Both parts of the question are fully addressed with a clear position, well-developed main ideas, and relevant supporting explanations, though the second body paragraph concentrates largely on health effects.

Ideas progress logically across clearly organised paragraphs with effective cohesive devices, although paragraph two's sequencing is slightly mechanical at points.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, with natural collocations such as thoroughly appealing, susceptible, and grossly outweighed, despite occasional overstatement affecting precision.

A wide range of sentence structures is used with good flexibility and control, and errors are minor and rarely impede communication.

The response fully addresses both questions, presents a clear position throughout, and develops each main idea with relevant explanation and examples, with only the psychological-harm claim somewhat under-supported.

Ideas progress logically across well-structured paragraphs with effective cohesive devices and clear referencing, though transitions within paragraphs are occasionally formulaic.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with natural use of less common items such as ubiquity, repercussions, and detrimental, and only rare imprecision.

A wide range of grammatical structures is used with flexibility and accuracy; minor slips such as subject-verb disagreement do not impede communication.

The response directly answers both questions with a clear position and well-developed, relevantly supported ideas, though the explanation of causes is somewhat narrow in scope.

Ideas are logically sequenced across clear paragraphs with skilful use of cohesive devices, and progression throughout is consistently easy to follow.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, with natural collocations such as sedentary lifestyle, self-serving justification, and ingrained habits, and only negligible lapses.

A wide range of structures, including complex and contrastive sentences, is used with strong accuracy and control, with only rare minor slips.