Writing Feedback / Writing task 2 - The topic is about education and people who had been serving in the prison [2]

Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later. Some people think that inviting these people to talk to school students is the best way to tell them about dangers of committing a crime.

Do you agree or disagree?

Exemplary residents who had been serving in the prison, are invited to deliver speeches in front of institutions in order to teach the students not to commit crimes in the future. While many people criticised that this is the worst idea to educate children, I strongly believe that the talks between these two particular groups of human beings will benefit youngsters and society for several reasons.

Firstly, many individuals argue that teaching drawbacks and dangers of illegal activities for pupils is definitely a wrong offer if the presenters were put in jails. Specifically, these individuals had many deviant thinkings and behaviours in the past and their aberrant ideology is able to exist deeply and permanently in their minds. Even though they are trained to talk with the girls and boys at the schools. Nevertheless, it is totally possible that the students are failed to be trained and they may have a sense of excitement to go through the crimes. For example, many children are in the habit of aping the casts of the habitual criminals on action films, they may imitate and conduct exactly every dangerous scene in the real life, as a consequence.

In contrast, there was no longer any doubt in my mind that the lessons, which were compiled with according to the experience of lawbreakers, will break a thoughtless mindset of young people about criminal acts before it has happened. Particularly, when learners in institutions go through extremely terrible emotions by listening to what the habitual criminals have experienced in the previous time in prison, these kids will be scared to think about sins. As a result, the percentage of kids who sin in the future will fall down steadily. Furthermore, they will have understood and not impacted adversely by unwholesome entertainments or gangster films when they enjoy watching these programmes on television.

In conclusion, new educational strategies are always a controversial debate topic because many people have mixed opinions about this. However, I confidently trust that the direct lessons from the people, who went to jail and become a solid citizen afterwards, will be the most effective source to educate little boys and girls well.

I truly wish all of you and the educational consultant @ Holt would help me check my writing.
Many thanks!

Writing Feedback / In many cities the constructions of new houses and office building is not controlled [3]

IELTS WRITING TASK 2 on building styles

Question:
In many cities the constructions of new houses and office building is not controlled. This leads to people building in whatever style they want without thinking about design.

Do the advantages of this trend outweigh disadvantages?

Answer:
It is true that the government does lack the construction policy to manage the building activities intensively to erect the brand-new flats and high-end workspaces in the cities at the moment. While I understand that critics may see this as a considerable contribution into the national architectural flourish, I strongly believe that the disadvantages do outweigh the advantages.

There are two main reasons why people might approve of uncontrollably raising new constructions in metropolitans. The first objection is that the massively estate-design syntonisation eliminates the main function of the architectural industry in human life. The industry clearly lasts along with the human's history and contributes largely into general achievements and developments of our species of humanity. The second argument supporting the freedom of constructing distinguished houses in the urban areas is that citizens spend their golden efforts and valuable youth in order to earn money and to possess their own properties. As a result, they are obviously able to build the house based on any personal design in their own desires in the sense of basic human rights.

In spite of the benefits mentioned above, I truly believe that the promulgation and administration of the liberal terms in the construction law to the estate-raising activities in towns is a negative measure. They key point in this issue is that negatively huge impacts of uncontrolled building activities will bring constructions an existence, which are fundamentally not guaranteed in terms of safety and hygienic conditions. For instance, the landlord or the owners of business premises would always prefer to invade the pavement, and it's not only in the land base but it's also in the upper space in order to take advantage of the extra area of land. As a result, people, who stroll on the sidewalk, definitely take risks of accidents due to the collapse of the long and large balcony above. By contrast, due to the baby-boomer era of Vietnam at the moment, massive demand of housing increases rapidly in the recent background of the policies and standards, and the risky flats and houses, which are just pieces of tiny space without any inner fire fighting and prevention system, will surely endanger the lives of local residents as the visible result.

In conclusion, it seems to me that we lose more than we gain from the self-monitored infrastructure that the uncontrolled constructions bring to our cities.