Task 2: Scientists believe that by studying the behavior of 3-year-old children, people can predict if those children can become criminals in the future.
To what extent is crime a product of human nature? Is it possible to stop children from growing to be a criminal?
[b]Research on the behavior of 3-year-old children is believed to be beneficial in predicting those children's likelihood to become criminals in the future. In my stance, crime could not be determined by genetics. Besides, there are some possible proposals to mitigate the trend of youngsters committing crimes in their adulthood.
To begin with, studying behavior of people when they are 3 years old could not assure that they would be criminals later on in life since their behavioral patterns are greatly influenced by life conditions. In other words, adversity in childhood is more likely to contribute to a child's crime in the future in lieu of their human nature. Specifically, household dysfunction may gradually form negative thinking and aggressive characteristics which would motivate juveniles to commit crime in their adulthood. Additionally, a vast majority of juvenile delinquency is rooted in poverty and the deficiency of proper education. As a matter of fact, people' behavior may alter through time depending on their external living environment. Therefore, early projection of a child's tendency to become criminals is irrational from my viewpoint.
Nevertheless, the cooperation between parents and the authorities may be helpful to mitigate the rate of juvenile delinquency. Initially, parents should be educated on how to be decent caregivers. It is of significance for parents to provide stable upbringings and a supportive familial environment to their children. The implication of this is that youngsters could be able to develop comprehensively without any mental illness that might be their crime motivation. Furthermore, the states ought to make crime and law-related lessons obligatory in school curriculum since education would act as a beneficial crime deterrent. As a result, children could be aware of the consequences of committing illegal activities and thereby minimizing their likelihood to become criminals in the future.
In conclusion, it remains steadfast in my belief that rather than human nature, crime is more likely to spring from people' external living conditions. Hence, I contend that the governments and the children' parents could bear the main responsibility to prevent youngsters growing up to be criminals.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 14,437 4691
Your writer's opinion did not establish the thesis statement as required by the questions provided. Therefore, you will not get a passing preliminary TA score. You failed to establish the correct discussion points, based on the expected response format in that paragraph. Next time, understand the questions and make sure that your responses align with the expected responses.
You are incorrectly focused in your responses as well. You are focused on juvenile delinquency when the profile is that of criminals in general, regardless of age. So your response will receive points, but only partial points due to the somewhat incorrect nature of your response to that question.
The essay is actually overwritten and could end up being open ended during the actual test. You would get an automatic failing score in that case because you wrote more than 300 words.
thank you so much for checking my essay! i deeply appreciate your effort. I just want to clarify that my thesis statement of this essay is that I do not think that crime is a product of human nature by paraphrasing it into "In my stance, crime could not be determined by genetics", and I also state that it is possible to stop children from growing to be a criminal by mentioning some possible proposals. And all the other mistakes in my essay you point out is really helpful for me to improve! thank you again!