Cambiar idioma
Escribe primero. El contador solo mide extensión: una persona debe aplicar la rúbrica y citar el fragmento que justifica cada puntuación.
Cada criterio vale 0–3: 0 ausente o contradictorio; 1 intento insuficiente; 2 logrado con imprecisiones; 3 logrado con precisión. Total: 15.
| Criterio | Nivel 3 | 0–3 |
|---|---|---|
| Fidelidad y alcance | Atribuye cada dato, conserva cantidad y certeza y no extrapola la muestra. | ___ / 3 |
| Argumento | Formula una postura, concede un límite real y responde a la objeción sin tergiversarla. | ___ / 3 |
| Estructura y cohesión | Ordena dato, interpretación y propuesta con conectores adecuados. | ___ / 3 |
| Registro | Ajusta cortesía y precisión al destinatario. | ___ / 3 |
| Lengua | Usa gramática y léxico C1 legibles sin errores que alteren el sentido. | ___ / 3 |
Redacta en inglés una nota para la dirección de la biblioteca. Decide si conviene ampliar el piloto nocturno de los martes. Usa las dos fuentes, distingue entradas de personas, admite un límite de la encuesta y recomienda una medida condicionada.
C1220–280 words
Eighty forms were collected at the front desk between 10:00 and 16:00 on weekdays. Sixty-two respondents ticked “later Tuesday opening”. The form did not ask about other evenings or how often respondents would attend. People who did not already visit the branch were not sampled.
Across four Tuesday evenings, the branch recorded 45 entries after 18:00. Some visitors came more than once, so entries are not unique people. Two staff members were on duty each evening. The current budget covers two further Tuesdays; it contains no estimate for opening every evening.
Palabras: 0 · 220–280
To: West Branch management
Subject: Tuesday evening opening
I recommend extending the Tuesday evening pilot for two more weeks, within the budget already approved, before deciding whether to make it permanent. The available evidence supports testing the service further, but it does not support an immediate expansion to every evening.
The visitor survey gives a useful signal: 62 of 80 respondents selected later Tuesday opening. However, forms were collected at the desk during weekday daytime hours. The sample therefore excludes people who do not currently visit and may miss those who would benefit most from evening access. The form also asked neither about other days nor about frequency of use. We should report the result as a preference among respondents, not as the preference of the whole neighbourhood.
The pilot log records 45 entries after 18:00 across four Tuesdays. That shows actual use, but repeat visitors mean it cannot be read as 45 different people. Two staff members worked each evening, while no cost estimate exists for daily opening. These limits matter to both the access case and the staffing decision.
For the two funded evenings, I suggest recording unique visitors as well as entries, asking visitors which other days they could use, and documenting staffing costs. We should also invite responses from people who do not currently visit. If demand remains clear and coverage can be funded, management could then consider a longer Tuesday trial or a carefully costed second evening. Until then, a permanent daily promise would go beyond the evidence.
La nota distingue 45 entradas de personas distintas, delimita la muestra diurna y condiciona cualquier ampliación al coste y a nuevos datos.
Responde en inglés, con cortesía, a esta objeción de un miembro del comité: “Las cifras demuestran que todos quieren una segunda mesa todas las tardes; anunciémosla ya”. Conserva el alcance de cada fuente, concede el problema real de las colas y propone un ensayo viable.
C1160–220 words
The desk recorded 36 complaints about waiting during April; 22 concerned Wednesday evening. The register lists 94 visitors for that period, but one person could have made more than one complaint. It does not record the views of every visitor.
Three volunteers are available on the next two Wednesdays. One volunteer is available on other evenings. No one has committed to further dates, and the centre has not costed a permanent second desk.
Palabras: 0 · 160–220
Dear committee member,
I agree that the waiting time deserves attention. The desk recorded 36 complaints in April, including 22 concerning Wednesday evening, so it would be reasonable to test an extra desk at that time. I would hesitate, however, to announce a permanent service every evening on the basis of these figures.
The register lists 94 visitors, but it does not say that all of them complained or wanted another desk. One person may also have complained more than once. The figures show a problem worth investigating, not a unanimous preference. In addition, the rota confirms three volunteers only for the next two Wednesdays. Other evenings have one available volunteer, and no permanent staffing or cost estimate has been agreed.
Could we run a second desk on those two Wednesdays, recording queue length, waiting time and the number of distinct visitors served? We could ask visitors whether that change helped and review the rota and costs before committing to more dates. This would respond to the Wednesday complaints promptly while keeping any longer-term promise tied to evidence and staffing we can actually provide.
Kind regards,
A committee colleague
La respuesta reconoce 22 quejas de miércoles, evita convertir 36 quejas en 36 personas y limita el ensayo a dos miércoles con personal confirmado.