与自己观点相同或相左的朋友

A clear position is given and relevant ideas are presented, but the view favouring like-minded friends is addressed only obliquely through criticism rather than genuine discussion, development is limited, and the response is 26 words under the minimum length.

Progression is broadly clear with logical paragraphing and linking devices such as 'Moreover' and 'As a result', though some cohesion is mechanical and ideas within paragraphs occasionally blur together.

Vocabulary is generally adequate for the task with some appropriate collocations like 'broaden their perspective' and 'blind acceptance', but there are imprecise phrases such as 'lack of different learning' and 'different strategies for self-improvement'.

A mix of simple and complex sentences is generally controlled, including relative and conditional clauses. Some constructions are awkward, particularly the final comparison between strategies for self-improvement and support, but meaning remains clear.

Both views are addressed with relevant ideas and examples, but the required personal opinion remains vague and shifts from the introduction to the conclusion, so the position is not fully clear.

Ideas are logically organised into clear paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices used naturally, and progression is generally easy to follow.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, with good collocations such as 'foster trust' and 'reinforcement of existing beliefs', and only minor awkward phrasing.

A variety of sentence structures is used with generally good control, and errors such as the faulty list construction 'cuisine, to create' are occasional and non-impeding.

The response addresses both views fully, presents a consistent personal opinion in the body and conclusion, and supports main ideas with relevant explanation and an example, though development remains somewhat general.

The essay is logically organised with clear paragraphing and a range of cohesive devices, though linking is occasionally mechanical and formulaic.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible for the topic with some precise collocations, but recurring phrases such as 'personal growth' and 'friends who always agree' show limited variation.

A variety of complex structures, including conditionals and relative clauses, is used with good control and only occasional minor errors that do not impede communication.

The essay addresses both perspectives, supports each with relevant examples, and presents a clear personal opinion in the conclusion, though some ideas are developed at a somewhat general level and the response falls slightly short of the length requirement.

Ideas are logically organised into clear paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices and referencing used naturally, producing smooth overall progression with only occasional slightly mechanical linking.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise for the topic, with phrases like 'diversity of thought' and 'group dynamics', though some choices such as 'folks' are informal and the range is not fully sophisticated.

A variety of complex structures, including subordinate clauses and participial constructions, is used with good control, and errors are rare and non-impeding despite some stiffness in a few sentences.

Both perspectives are addressed with developed reasons and relevant personal examples, and a clear, consistent opinion is presented throughout and in the conclusion.

Ideas progress logically across well-sequenced paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices, though some transitions such as 'On the contrary' are slightly mechanical.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, with less common items like 'altercations', 'advocate for' and 'belief systems', alongside occasional awkward collocations.

A variety of complex structures are used with good control, but recurring minor errors, such as 'the way think' and 'contrasting views than ours', somewhat reduce overall accuracy.