语言学习中的班级规模

The response covers both views thoroughly, maintains a consistent opinion throughout, and supports main ideas with relevant explanation and examples, though some claims such as 'certain studies' are not substantiated.

Paragraphing is logical, progression is clear, and cohesive devices are used naturally, with only minor lapses in cohesion within sentences.

There is a good range of less common vocabulary used with some flexibility, but imprecise items like 'attendants' for students and 'detrimental' for 'irrelevant' slightly limit precision.

A wide range of structures is used flexibly with generally good control, including complex sentences and conditionals, with only occasional minor punctuation and phrasing errors that do not impede understanding.

Both views are addressed and the opinion is clear and consistent. Relevant examples develop the main ideas, although the links from group work and independent app practice to class-size independence could be explained more explicitly.

The response progresses logically through clear paragraphs. Some repetition weakens the progression within the large-class paragraph, where technology is introduced in the group-work sentence and then introduced again with “Furthermore”.

Vocabulary is flexible and generally precise, including “personalized attention” and “targeted support”. Occasional wordiness, such as “debate” followed by “topic of discussion”, reduces concision without obscuring meaning.

A wide range of grammatical structures is used with flexibility and accuracy, and error is rare and minor throughout.