[
    {
        "test_id": "3693",
        "exam_id": "apihub",
        "exam_name": "ApiHub DM grading",
        "part_id": "5",
        "part_description": "",
        "baimau": "Model answer\n\nThe bar chart compares the annual number of visitors to three museums: the MET in New York, the Edo-Tokyo Museum, and the National Museum of China, over a six-year period from 2000 to 2005.\nOverall, the MET, New York and the National Museum of China experienced upward trends in visitor numbers, whereas the Edo-Tokyo Museum witnessed a decline. By 2005, the National Museum of China recorded the highest number of visitors among the three museums.\nIn 2000, the Edo-Tokyo Museum had the largest attendance, attracting approximately 13 million visitors. This was followed by the MET, New York which received around 12 million visitors, while the National Museum of China had the lowest figure, just under 7 million. However, the number of visitors to the Edo-Tokyo Museum gradually decreased throughout the period, falling to about 10 million by 2005.\nIn contrast, the National Museum of China saw a steady increase, surpassing the other two museums in 2003 and reaching nearly 16 million visitors by 2005. The MET showed some fluctuation, with a decline in 2001 and 2002, but recovered significantly and peaked at around 14 million visitors in 2005.\n \n(188 words)",
        "bai_lam_writing": "Exercise 7. You should spend about 20 minutes on this taskThe graph below shows the number of visitors to three museums between 2000 and 2005.\nSummarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.\nWrite at least 150 words",
        "de_bai_luc_thi": "Exercise 7. You should spend about 20 minutes on this task The graph below shows the number of visitors to three museums between 2000 and 2005.\nSummarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.\nWrite at least 150 words",
        "prompt": "As an experienced English teacher, your task is to:\n\n* Evaluate student writing assignments based on the provided rubric.\n* Provide a total score out of 10.\n* Offer constructive feedback based on the rubric and include suggestions for improvement.\n* Rewrite the student's essay into an improved version.\n\nWriting Assignment Marking Rubric (Out of 10 Points)\n\nTask Response (Content and Ideas):\n* Excellent (9-10 points): Rich ideas clearly presented; fully addresses the prompt.\n* Good (7-8 points): Good ideas that mostly address the prompt but may lack depth.\n* Satisfactory (5-6 points): Basic ideas present; partially addresses the prompt.\n* Needs Improvement (0-4 points): Lacks clear ideas; does not address the prompt.\n\nCoherence & Cohesion (Organization):\n* Excellent (9-10 points): Clear, logical structure with strong flow.\n* Good (7-8 points): Generally organized; minor issues with flow.\n* Satisfactory (5-6 points): Some organization; unclear transitions.\n* Needs Improvement (0-4 points): Disorganized and difficult to follow.\n\nLexical Resource (Language and Style):\n* Excellent (9-10 points): Engaging and varied language; appropriate tone.\n* Good (7-8 points): Generally clear language with some engaging elements.\n* Satisfactory (5-6 points): Basic language; tone may be inconsistent.\n* Needs Improvement (0-4 points): Limited language; inappropriate tone; may be confusing.\n\nGrammatical Range & Accuracy (Grammar and Mechanics):\n* Excellent (9-10 points): Few to no errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation.\n* Good (7-8 points): Some errors, but they do not distract from the content.\n* Satisfactory (5-6 points): Several errors that may distract the reader.\n* Needs Improvement (0-4 points): Frequent errors that severely impact readability.\n\nPlease evaluate the student writing assignment below and score each of the four criteria according to the rubric above (each criterion is scored as a whole number from 0 to 10). Use simple language so the student can easily understand the feedback.\n\nCalculate the Overall Score as the average of the four criterion scores, then round it DOWN to the nearest 0.5 using this rule: if the decimal part is less than .5, round down to .0; if the decimal part is .5 or greater, round down to .5. For example: 7.8 becomes 7.5; 7.4 becomes 7.0; 8.2 becomes 8.0; 8.6 becomes 8.5. Write the Overall Score as a single number (do not write it as a fraction such as \"X/10\").\n\nA sample answer is provided below for reference. Use it only as a benchmark to help calibrate your scoring and feedback (e.g., what a strong response to this prompt looks like) — do not copy it into your feedback and do not penalize the student merely for writing differently from it.\n\nAfter scoring, rewrite the student's essay into an improved version. Keep the student's original ideas, structure, and voice — do not change the topic or add new content the student did not write. Fix grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structure issues, and improve flow and word choice where needed, so the result reads as a stronger version of the same essay.\n\nYour response must strictly follow this exact format. Use the exact criterion names below (do not translate, rename, or reword them). Write every score as a plain number only (e.g. \"6\"), never as \"6/10\". Put \"Feedback\" and \"Suggestion for improvement:\" each on their own new line:\n\nOverall Score:\n\n1. Task Response score:\nFeedback on Task Response:\nSuggestion for improvement:\n2. Coherence & Cohesion score:\nFeedback on Coherence & Cohesion:\nSuggestion for improvement:\n3. Lexical Resource score:\nFeedback on Lexical Resource:\nSuggestion for improvement:\n4. Grammatical Range & Accuracy score:\nFeedback on Grammatical Range & Accuracy:\nSuggestion for improvement:\n\nImproved Essay:\n\nWriting Assignment Prompt:\nExercise 7. You should spend about 20 minutes on this task The graph below shows the number of visitors to three museums between 2000 and 2005.\nSummarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.\nWrite at least 150 words\n\nSample: Model answer\n\nThe bar chart compares the annual number of visitors to three museums: the MET in New York, the Edo-Tokyo Museum, and the National Museum of China, over a six-year period from 2000 to 2005.\nOverall, the MET, New York and the National Museum of China experienced upward trends in visitor numbers, whereas the Edo-Tokyo Museum witnessed a decline. By 2005, the National Museum of China recorded the highest number of visitors among the three museums.\nIn 2000, the Edo-Tokyo Museum had the largest attendance, attracting approximately 13 million visitors. This was followed by the MET, New York which received around 12 million visitors, while the National Museum of China had the lowest figure, just under 7 million. However, the number of visitors to the Edo-Tokyo Museum gradually decreased throughout the period, falling to about 10 million by 2005.\nIn contrast, the National Museum of China saw a steady increase, surpassing the other two museums in 2003 and reaching nearly 16 million visitors by 2005. The MET showed some fluctuation, with a decline in 2001 and 2002, but recovered significantly and peaked at around 14 million visitors in 2005.\n \n(188 words)\n\nHere is the student's essay:\nExercise 7. You should spend about 20 minutes on this taskThe graph below shows the number of visitors to three museums between 2000 and 2005.\nSummarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.\nWrite at least 150 words"
    }
]