In many countries, imprisonment is the most common solution to crime, however, some people believe that better education will be more effective solution.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Opinions are divided on whether imprisonment should be the primary punishment for crime. Some people think that an improvement in education can serve as a better alternative to incarceration. I disagree with this view for several reasons.
First of all, there is not scientific proof that clearly shows the correlation between person's education and the crimes he or she committed. I believe that, given the circumstances and the right conditions, everyone educated or not is capable of committing crime. Furthermore, first-degree felonies must be punished exclusively by imprisonment because these people are a danger to society.
The fact that punishment should follow crime is another reason why a better education is not a better solution to crime. Education would simply be considered as a reward and more crime would follow. It is the fear of imprisonment that in most cases keeps people from conducting criminal activities. It is for this reason that various times are set for criminals to serve in the prison. During this time, convicted people have a chance to reevaluate the wrong they have done in the past and redeem themselves.
Moreover, prisons nowadays are well-equipped with infrastructure, such as libraries, for example. Therefore, if convicted wish to improve their education, they can always find an access to various educational resources. With the development of technology and internet, they can even attend universities through an online distance-learning.
In conclusion, although an education could be seen as a better alternative to incarceration, I believe criminals can only be corrected through the means of imprisonment. In such way, public would be more safe, and convicted would be more prepared to enter the society. Therefore, imprisonment is a better solution to crime than education.
grammar issues:
... there is no scientific proof ... between a person's ...
... committing a crime
they can always find an access to ...
... technology and the internet, ... through an online ...
..., public would be safer, and convicted ... to enter the society.
And in paragraph one, the essay architecture should be introduced.
@shinxg
thank you very much, I appreciate your feedback!
Holt Educational Consultant - / 14,797 
4780 You forgot to indicate the strength of your opinion in the essay. Remember, the keyword in the original instruction is "extent". That requires you to use a measured response that shows an emotional capacity to support or not support a given statement. Some measurement words you can use are "Fully, totally, partially, equally, great extent", among others. Save for that missing response element, you did a good job in rephrasing the discussion for the examiner.
You gave a coherent, discussion. However, you still had problems with sentence formation and vocabulary usage at certain points. I hope to see you improving in these aspects moving forward. By the way, in the conclusion, you restated your stand twice. You only need to state that once. The last sentence could always be a restatement of the original discussion topic. Use the following format when you can:
- restate the topic
- indicate your stance
- formulate the reasoning summary in a concluding sentence manner.
@Holt
Thank you for taking time to go through my essay and giving valuable comments. I really appreciate it.
