Talents— Part 1 採点レポート

提案: Be more direct and concise. Start with a clear topic sentence stating the talent (e.g., studying skills), then give one or two specific supporting details (how long you've practiced, a concrete achievement). Use linking words (however, although, because) to connect ideas and avoid unclear fragments. Keep to a maximum of 3–4 sentences.

例: I’m good at studying and organizing my learning. For example, I developed a study routine in high school that helped me score top marks in several subjects. Although I wouldn’t call it a dramatic talent, it has consistently helped me achieve good results.

提案: Answer clearly about timing: say when you started and when it developed further. Use one linking phrase to show contrast or progression (e.g., “since,” “but when”). Provide a concise example of how university changed your approach. Avoid filler sounds and informal hesitations.

例: I developed good study habits from a very young age, but they became more focused when I started university. At university I chose my courses and study methods, which helped me refine my time management and study strategies.

提案: Directly link the talent to future job benefits. Start with a clear statement (Yes/No) then explain how studying skills help (learning quickly, researching, meeting deadlines). Acknowledge a weakness briefly and contrast it with strengths using linking words (however, although). Avoid vague terms like “visual intelligence.”

例: Yes — my strong study skills are useful at work because they help me learn new tasks quickly and meet deadlines. However, I realize I need to improve my social skills, so I’m working on communication and teamwork to complement my technical abilities.

提案: Be specific and tidy: state clearly who, how they show the talent, and give one concrete example of achievements. Use linking words like “for example” and avoid filler words. Keep it to 2–3 sentences.

例: Yes, my sister has the same talent. For example, she won several academic competitions and received top grades and awards for her thesis, which shows she’s an excellent student.

× Not that I can speak of.

✓ Not that I can think of.

The student used 'speak of' incorrectly for this context. The correct idiom is 'think of' meaning 'I don't have anything to mention.' Replace 'speak of' with 'think of' to convey the intended meaning.

× The only thing I can mention is probably how good we've studied I am.

✓ The only thing I can mention is probably how well I have studied.

The original mixes word order and incorrect clause structure. Use 'how well I have studied' to express degree of studying; 'well' is an adverb modifying 'have studied' and the subject 'I' must precede the auxiliary 'have.'

× But even with those results, I would say I'm just a bit better than average people.

✓ But even with those results, I would say I'm just a bit better than the average person.

Comparisons should be made to 'the average person' or 'average people' without 'the.' Saying 'better than average people' is awkward; use singular 'the average person' for a general comparison.

× So no, I'm not really good at anything.

✓ So no, I'm not really particularly good at anything.

Minor stylistic improvement: adding 'particularly' clarifies degree. The original is grammatical but adding the adverb makes the sentence sound more natural.

× I'm pretty much LA or across and talents and whatever you can think of and including.

✓ I'm pretty much lacking in talents or any of the things you can think of.

The original sentence is ungrammatical and unclear. 'LA or across' seems to be mispronounced or incorrect. 'Lacking in talents' correctly expresses absence of talents; 'or any of the things you can think of' completes the idea.

× Was it mastered recently or when you were young?

✓ Did you master it recently or when you were young?

The examiner's question uses 'mastered' passively which is okay, but for directness 'Did you master it...' is more natural. If keeping passive, 'Was it mastered recently or when you were young?' is also grammatical, but the student's response should match.

× I think those UMM studying skills got real into me since a really early age, but I kind of get to know myself more when I enter uni and when I had more authority in terms of what and how and where I want to land.

✓ I think those studying skills really got into me from a very early age, but I got to know myself better when I entered university and had more control over what, how, and where I wanted to go.

Multiple issues: use 'got into me' with 'really' before the verb phrase; 'since' should be 'from' with a point in time or use 'since' with present perfect. Tense consistency: 'entered' and 'wanted' (past) match the past period referenced. 'Authority' is better as 'control' in this context; 'uni' expanded to 'university.'

× Well, I'm already working right now, so I know that it works out quite perfectly.

✓ Well, I'm already working right now, so I know that it works out quite well.

'Works out quite perfectly' is redundant; 'quite well' is the natural collocation. The tense is fine; adjust adverb to sound natural.

× One drawback, though, is that I'm not really good at social skills.

✓ One drawback, though, is that I'm not very good at social skills.

'Not really good at' is acceptable, but 'not very good at' is more idiomatic. No major grammatical error, just a more natural phrasing.

× And you know that in this age, visual intelligence and social skills and being human is even more important than technical skills.

✓ And you know that in this age, visual intelligence, social skills, and being human are even more important than technical skills.

When listing multiple subjects connected by 'and', the verb must be plural: use 'are' not 'is'. Also add commas between list items. 'Being human' is abstract but acceptable; ensure subject-verb agreement.

× I think my sister does have the same talent as me.

✓ I think my sister does have the same talent as I do.

While 'as me' is common in speech, the more formal and grammatically precise form is 'as I do' (subject pronoun plus auxiliary). This clarifies the comparison.

× She's good at studying as well, umm, students at a really early age.

✓ She was good at studying as well from a really early age.

The fragment 'students at a really early age' is ungrammatical. Likely intended: 'from a really early age.' Use past 'was' if referring to childhood ability, or 'has been' for continuity. Here 'was' matches context where childhood is discussed.

× Umm, she got many certificates and uh, mini prizes from her competitions and let us just like got our first class orders from her thesis.

✓ She got many certificates and small prizes from her competitions, and she even received a first-class distinction for her thesis.

The original contains awkward phrases: 'mini prizes' -> 'small prizes'; 'let us just like got our first class orders from her thesis' is unclear. Likely meaning: 'received a first-class distinction for her thesis.' Rephrase for clarity and correct vocabulary.