{
  "session": 2,
  "date": "2026-08-10",
  "subject": "writing",
  "answers": {
    "practice": [
      {"q": 1, "answer": "B", "explanation": "论点句需要表达清晰的立场，B选项明确表达了'我同意'并给出了两个具体理由，是最强的论点句。A选项是事实陈述而非观点，C选项过于模糊，D选项只是提出问题。"},
      {"q": 2, "answer": "C", "explanation": "C选项使用连接词衔接两个相关论点（'此外'引进递进论证），因果关系清晰。A选项逻辑跳跃，B选项无递进关系，D选项前后矛盾。"},
      {"q": 3, "answer": "B", "explanation": "Task 2评分标准中，Task Response（任务回应）权重最高，因为必须先回应题目要求才能得分。其次是Coherence & Cohesion（连贯与衔接）。"},
      {"q": 4, "answer": "A是正确的√，B是错误的×", "explanation": "A正确——一个清晰的主题句能让考官快速理解段落主旨，是高分关键。B错误——正文段落需要包含Topic Sentence + Supporting Ideas（解释/例证/结果），仅有主题句是不够的。"},
      {"q": 5, "answer": "introduction", "explanation": "立场（position/opinion）应在引言段（introduction）的最后一句——即thesis statement中明确提出，而不是等到结论段才首次表态。"},
      {"q": 6, "answer": "paraphrase", "explanation": "引言段第一步是paraphrase（改写题目），即用自己的话重述题目中的话题和问题，而不是直接抄写原题。"},
      {"q": 7, "answer": "coherence; cohesive devices", "explanation": "Coherence指逻辑上的连贯（观点之间和段落之间的逻辑关系），cohesive devices指语言上的衔接手段（如连接词、代词、同义替换等）。"}
    ],
    "vocabulary_quiz": [
      {"q": 8, "answer": "B. deteriorate", "explanation": "'deteriorate'意为恶化、变差，与'worsen'同义。decline（下降）、deteriorate（恶化）、degenerate（退化）中，deteriorate最贴合'变糟'的语义。"},
      {"q": 9, "answer": "C. implementing / alleviating", "explanation": "'implement measures' = 实施措施，'alleviate the problem' = 缓解问题，两者搭配地道且语义通顺。"},
      {"q": 10, "answer": "detrimental / advantageous / controversial", "explanation": "'detrimental to' = 对……有害，'advantageous' = 有利的，'controversial' = 有争议的。三个词均为Task 2高频替换词。"}
    ],
    "essay_sample": {
      "topic": "Some people believe that governments should spend money on building new public libraries, while others think this money should be spent on improving digital resources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.",
      "sample": "In the digital age, the allocation of public funds has become a contentious issue, particularly regarding whether governments should invest in traditional libraries or prioritize digital resources. While both approaches have merit, I believe a balanced strategy that integrates the two is most sensible.\n\nOn the one hand, proponents of physical libraries argue that these institutions serve functions beyond merely housing books. Public libraries provide quiet study spaces, foster community engagement, and offer access to knowledge for disadvantaged groups who may lack internet connectivity or digital literacy. For example, in rural areas of developing countries, libraries often remain the sole source of educational materials for schoolchildren. Moreover, libraries function as cultural hubs, hosting reading clubs, workshops, and exhibitions that strengthen social cohesion.\n\nOn the other hand, advocates for digital investment contend that allocating funds to digital resources offers greater reach and cost-efficiency. A single online database can be accessed by millions simultaneously, whereas a physical library has limited capacity. E-books, academic journals, and online courses can be updated instantly and delivered to remote learners at minimal marginal cost. Furthermore, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of robust digital infrastructure for uninterrupted learning has become unmistakably clear.\n\nIn my view, pitting these two options against each other represents a false dichotomy. The most effective approach is to integrate digital resources within physical libraries, creating hybrid learning environments. Governments could equip existing libraries with computers, high-speed internet, and subscriptions to online databases, thereby combining the accessibility of digital tools with the communal benefits of a shared physical space. This strategy has been successfully implemented in cities such as Helsinki and Seoul, where 'smart libraries' have seen increased visitor numbers and user satisfaction.\n\nIn conclusion, rather than choosing between physical libraries and digital resources, governments should pursue a complementary model. By modernizing traditional libraries with digital infrastructure, policymakers can ensure equitable access to knowledge while preserving the irreplaceable social value of community learning spaces.",
      "word_count": 296,
      "band_score": "8.0",
      "commentary": "结构完整（引言-正方-反方-个人观点-结论），每段有清晰主题句；论点有具体例证支撑；词汇丰富（contentious, dichotomy, hybrid, complementary等）；衔接自然（On the one hand, Moreover, In light of, In conclusion）。不足之处：第三段个人观点稍短，可再增加一个例证以达到300+词更稳妥。"
    }
  }
}