自行车— Part 1 評分報告

建議: Your response simply repeated the examiner's question instead of answering. Give a direct answer (yes/no) with a short topic sentence, then add one or two specific supporting details using linking words. Keep it natural and within 3–4 sentences.

範例: Yes, I had a bike when I was a child. It was a small red bicycle with training wheels, which I used to ride around my neighborhood every evening. Because my parents lived nearby, they often came with me to the park so I could practice safely.

建議: Your answer gives an opinion but is too brief and informal. Start with a clear topic sentence, then support it with specific reasons and a linking word (for example, because or however). Avoid informal contractions like 'cause' and use more precise vocabulary. Keep it to 2–4 sentences.

範例: I don't think bikes are very popular in my country because public transport is more convenient. For example, double-decker buses and minibuses run frequently and can carry many passengers, so most people prefer them for commuting.

× No cause there are double decker buses and minibuses better than bikes.

✓ No, because double-decker buses and minibuses are better than bikes.

The original sentence has multiple issues: missing conjunction/connector ('because'), informal 'cause' instead of 'because', missing comma after introductory negation, missing hyphen in 'double-decker', and incorrect word order/omission of verb in the comparative clause. This is a sentence structure error (ID 26). To improve: use 'because' for formal responses, include a comma after 'No', hyphenate compound adjectives like 'double-decker', and include the verb 'are' to form a complete comparative clause ('are better than bikes').