Task Achievement:
The essay effectively addresses both parts of the prompt—explaining the reasons for people’s interest in their home’s history and suggesting methods for researching it. The response is well-developed, with clear explanations and relevant examples. However, the second reason (practical concerns about structural safety) could be expanded slightly to strengthen the argument.
Coherence and Cohesion:
The essay is logically structured, with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph flows well, and cohesive devices (e.g., "The first reason," "Another factor," "In conclusion") help guide the reader. However, some transitions between ideas could be smoother—for example, the shift from sentimental curiosity to structural concerns feels abrupt.
Lexical Resource:
The vocabulary is appropriate and varied (e.g., "innate curiosity," "pragmatic," "municipal offices"). However, there are minor instances where word choice could be more precise (e.g., "link with the history" could be "connect with the past"). Some phrases are slightly repetitive (e.g., "research" is used multiple times).
Grammatical Range and Accuracy:
Grammar is mostly accurate, with a mix of simple and complex structures. However, there are a few minor errors:
Suggestions for Improvement:
Overall, this is a strong response that meets the task requirements effectively. With slight refinements in cohesion, vocabulary, and grammar, it could be even more polished.