Ielts PART 2 . Topic: Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later, and it is often argued that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

[rynana]

It can not be denied that people after being in prison are likely to be good citizens then. Many people contend that ex-prisoners are the best people to explain the adolescents the negatives impacts of becoming offenders. I completely disagree with this point of view for some reasons.

Firstly, it is obvious that the ex-prisoners have considerate contributions to discipline the next generation. That is, after a long period of being educated in the prison, they have gained a deeper understanding of their fault and make a sense of how to correct their wrongdoing. Therefore, it is easier for them to make a speech to teenagers that adolescent had better behave in moral ways and avoid being committed offence.

On the other hand, there are various reasons why ex-prisoners are not truly suitable for talking to teenagers about the dangerous aspects of being an offender. Perhaps the principal reason for this view is that adolescent should be disciplined in the early years by their parents and teachers. That is the importance of education about laws and proper manners in the mature process of a boy or a girl. As a result, teenagers probably make a sense of what they should do to prevent them from committing a crime. For example, in primary school, students are given discipline about the codes of morality and legal system and encouraged to become good citizens.

In conclusion, for the reason I mentioned above, I strongly believe that people have been in prison are always the best ones who can play a vital role in crime education. Besides, combining between parental and schooling methods of education leads to more positive outcomes.

[Luschen]

Hi Rynana, I am sorry but you have not addressed this prompt in the correct way.
This is not a “discuss both sides and give your opinion” prompt, it is a “to what extent do you agree or disagree” prompt. So you should pick one side or the other and only argue for that side. Writing the wrong type of essay will hurt your TA score. In addition, your thesis statement does not match your conclusion. In your thesis you say you disagree that ex-prisoners are the best people to talk to teenagers, but your essay argues that they are indeed the best. A mistake like this would really lower your band score, so always make sure your thesis matches your essay. Here are some other suggestions:

@rynana

It can not be denied that people after being in prison are [often] likely to be good citizens [from then on]. [In light of this,] Many people contend that ex-prisoners are the best people to explain [to] the adolescents the [negative] impacts of becoming offenders. I completely disagree with this point of view for some reasons[ that this essay will discuss]. {“for some reason” means for a reason that you cannot really name - “For some reason, she just seems weird to me.” so I would avoid using “some reason/s”}

Firstly, it is obvious that the ex-prisoners have [the ability to make] considerate contributions to discipline the next generation. That is, after a long period of being educated in the prison, they have gained a deeper understanding of their [faults]
and make a sense of how to correct their wrongdoing. Therefore, it is easier for them to make a speech to teenagers that [adolescents] had better behave in moral ways and avoid being committed [to prison for their offenses].

On the other hand, there are various reasons why ex-prisoners are not truly suitable for talking to teenagers about the dangerous aspects of being an offender. Perhaps the principal reason for this view is that [adolescents] should be disciplined in [their] early years by their parents and teachers. That is [when] the [important] education [should take place] about laws and proper manners in the [maturation] process of a boy or a girl. {your sentence did not make sense before - is this what you meant?} As a result, teenagers probably [already have] make a sense of what they should do to prevent [themselves] from committing a crime. For example, in primary school, students are given discipline about the codes of morality and [the] legal system and encouraged to become good citizens. {the prompt is not really asking when the best time to talk is, it is concerned instead about who are the best people to talk to teenagers - make sure to always stick as close as possible to the prompt}

In conclusion, for the reason I mentioned above, I strongly believe that people [who] have been in prison are always the best ones who can [to] play a vital role in crime education. Besides, combining [ex-felons’ instruction with] between parental and schooling methods of education leads to more positive outcomes.