尝试新事物与坚守熟悉的习惯

Both attitudes are discussed and a clear opinion is given, but ideas are only partly developed and explanations are often unclear or unconvincing, reflecting partial task achievement.

A four-paragraph structure and basic cohesive devices are present, but progression within paragraphs is weak, transitions are mechanical, and some statements do not connect logically to what precedes them.

The response attempts some less common vocabulary such as 'plethora' and 'penurious', but much of the wording is restricted and frequently misused, and errors in word choice and word formation reduce precision and clarity.

A mix of simple and complex forms is attempted, yet frequent errors in agreement, article use, and sentence construction often obscure the intended message, fitting a limited grammatical range with regular inaccuracy.

The essay addresses both attitudes, presents a clear personal opinion throughout, and supports each view with relevant explanation and examples, though the examples remain somewhat general and one is slightly underdeveloped.

Ideas progress logically through clearly signposted paragraphs with effective cohesive devices, although linking is at times mechanical and the argument within paragraphs could be pushed further.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and often precise, with phrases like broaden one's perspective and sense of predictability, but there is noticeable repetition of expressions such as enriching experience.

A range of complex structures is used with good control, including relative and conditional forms, with only minor slips such as taking challenges and occasional awkward phrasing that do not impede understanding.

The response addresses all parts of the task, presents a clear and consistent opinion, and develops each attitude with explanation and a relevant example, though some supporting points remain general.

Ideas progress logically across well-organised paragraphs with effective use of cohesive devices, although some transitions and referencing are slightly mechanical.

A good range of vocabulary is used with some flexibility (e.g. 'trailblazer', 'befall', 'comfort zone'), though occasional errors such as 'contended' for 'content' reduce precision.

A variety of complex structures is used with generally good control, and most sentences are error-free, with only minor slips in agreement and phrasing.

Both attitudes are addressed and a clear personal position is presented and sustained, but the discussion of the familiar-life view is developed more thinly than the opposing side.

The response is logically organised with a clear progression, effective paragraphing and cohesive devices, though some linking choices are slightly mechanical.

A wide and mostly natural vocabulary range is demonstrated, including items such as 'unquenchable thirst', 'nomadic life' and 'non-traditional', with only occasional imprecision.

A good range of complex structures is used with flexibility and accuracy, and errors are minor and rarely impede understanding.

Both attitudes are fully addressed, main ideas are well developed with relevant examples, and a clear, consistent opinion is presented in the introduction and conclusion.

Ideas progress logically through clear paragraphing and cohesive devices, though the organisation feels slightly mechanical in places with predictable sequencing like 'Firstly' and 'Secondly'.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, with good topic-related range, but some collocations and expressions are somewhat formulaic rather than naturally varied.

A wide range of structures is used with generally good control, including complex sentences and relative clauses, with only rare, minor errors such as a slightly awkward linking of clauses near the end of the third paragraph.