Bike— Part 1 採点レポート

提案: Expand the response with a brief topic sentence and one or two specific supporting details (e.g., what kind of bike, how you used it, a short memory). Keep it natural, avoid redundancy, and limit to about 2–4 sentences. Use a linking word if you add a second detail (for example, “and” or “because”).

例: Yes, I did. I had a small red bicycle with training wheels and I rode it almost every day around my neighborhood. Because it was lightweight, I could easily carry it up the stairs to our apartment.

提案: Your answer is relevant and concise. Improve by adding one specific supporting detail or example (use a linking word like “for example,” “because,” or “also”) to make the opinion more convincing and natural. Mention a concrete reason or comparison (e.g., urban commuting, traffic, bike lanes). Keep the total response within 3–4 sentences.

例: I would say so, especially because of their affordability and ease of transport. For example, many people in cities use bikes to avoid traffic jams and there are dedicated bike lanes that make cycling safer and faster.

× Yes, I did.

✓ Yes, I did.

The sentence is grammatically correct and appropriately answers the past-tense question 'Did you have a bike when you were a child?' No changes needed.

× I would say so, especially because of their affordability and ease of transport.

✓ I would say so, especially because of their affordability and the ease of transporting them.

While the original sentence is generally acceptable in spoken English, improving parallelism and clarity helps. 'Ease of transport' is understandable but slightly awkward; 'the ease of transporting them' makes the object (bikes) explicit and maintains parallel structure with 'affordability.' This is a stylistic improvement rather than a correction of a listed grammar error; none of the specified grammar problem types strictly apply.