0 votes
0 votes

Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later. Some people think that having these people give a talk to school students is the best way to tell them about the dangers of committing a crime. Do you agree or disagree?


Crime education is a topic of interest for teachers, students and parents. It is true that using ex-prisoners to educate students about the dangers of committing a crime is an effective way. However, I believe that there are other better methods to tackle this matter.

On the one hand, I agree that students may be aware of the consequences of offending by talking with those who were released from jail. Pupils may be impessed or attracted effortlessly by the former prisoners’ life stories, which were really vivid and persuasive. These ex-criminals are real examples that people have to pay for their lawless activities, which can raise awareness about the priority of observing law among young people. The success of a series of educational programs on Vietnamese Television channels about the price that offenders have to pay proves that this forms of crime education can work.

On the other hand, I suppose that combining some educational approaches is more practical. Firstly, children had better be receive the crime education from their parents at the early age. It has profound effect to educate students in the home environment as that is the time to shape their mindset and personality. It is the fact that there are many criminals offended due to the poor education in their childhood. Secondly, teachers at schools play an important role in raising the awareness of their students about crime via positive education environment. Watching documental video is aslo an effective alternative because of its realistic.

In conclusion, although given students talks to ex-offenders is advantagous, there are more convincing to using other methods for crime education.

0 points

Please log in or register to answer this question.

Related questions

0 votes
0 votes
1 answer