工作满意度的影响因素与现实预期

Both questions are addressed with a relevant position and supporting ideas, but development is uneven and the discussion of realism is only partially convincing.

Ideas progress in a broadly logical order with paragraphing, though cohesion is at times mechanical and some sentences connect ideas imprecisely.

There is adequate range of work-related vocabulary, but several inaccurate or unnatural collocations such as 'mostly folks ubiquitously' reduce precision.

A mix of structures is used with generally clear meaning, but errors in articles, pronoun agreement, and verb forms occur frequently enough to be noticeable.

The response addresses both questions with relevant factors and examples, but the position and conclusion remain somewhat vague rather than clearly stating how realistic job satisfaction for all workers is.

Ideas are arranged in paragraphs with broadly clear progression, yet cohesion is mechanical and some links, such as the introductory and career-start sentences, are illogical or filler-based.

The vocabulary shows adequate range including topic-appropriate items, but there are frequent awkward and inaccurate collocations such as 'generates a great way of heated debate' and 'increment the salary of workers'.

A mix of simple and complex structures is used with generally clear meaning, though recurring errors in agreement, article use, and sentence construction reduce overall accuracy.

The response addresses both questions directly, maintains a clear position that universal satisfaction is unrealistic, and supports main ideas with relevant examples, though development is general rather than extended in depth.

Ideas are organised logically across clear paragraphs with a steady progression and appropriate linking devices, although connections are sometimes formulaic and development within paragraphs is moderate.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible for the topic with some precise collocations such as 'artistic expression' and 'interpersonal relationships', but there is noticeable repetition of key phrases and occasional informality like 'a tough challenge'.

A variety of complex structures, including conditionals and relative clauses, are used with generally good control, and errors are rare and do not impede understanding, though range is not consistently ambitious.

The response answers both questions directly, states a clear position, and develops main ideas with relevant explanation, though the second part relies on general assertion rather than fully extended support.

Ideas progress logically across well-managed paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices used naturally, with only occasional slightly mechanical linking.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, with good collocations such as sense of purpose and atmosphere of oppression, and only minor imprecision.

A range of complex structures is used with flexibility and accuracy, and most sentences are error-free with only rare minor slips.

The response addresses both parts of the task with a clear position, well-developed main ideas, and relevant examples, though the development of the second question is somewhat brief.

Ideas progress logically with clear paragraphing and effective linking devices, but some cohesive references and example support are imprecise at points.

Vocabulary is flexible and precise in places (disenchantment, compensated fairly, unrealistic prospect), with natural collocation and only minor imprecision.

A wide range of structures is used with strong control, including conditionals and relative clauses, and errors are rare and non-impeding.