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.

It is true that many people have improved to be good citizens after a period in prison. It is believed that they are perfect for giving examples of the risk of committing illegal acts to young people. I completely agree with this point of view. The following essay will discuss in details about it.

It is obvious that young people are more likely to listen to a person who has real-life experience. Not only do ex-prisoners have knowledge about the prison life but they can also tell teenagers how they got involved in crime, which can help youngsters avoid offending. Having experienced the harsh prison conditions, different prisoners know how offenders are really treated during their time in prison so they can explain in a better and deeper way the consequences of committing. Obviously, such stories would help prevent teenagers from engaging in illegal acts.

On the other hand, there are alternative ways to educate young people the serious effects of crime. Nevertheless, those measures are less effective. Although teenagers can learn about the dangers of a criminal life by watching movies about crime and punishment, these kinds of videos seem to be entertaining rather than educating. To make teachers and police responsible for educating students is another possible way. However, youngsters are hardly responsive to a person of authority who do not have real-life experience.

In conclusion, I would argue that reformed prisoners are completely suitable for giving advise for the young since they have real-life experience which is not available in alternative ways of educating. Their stories, which are real and persuasive, can be valuable lessons for teenagers.

Votes
Average: 6.1 (1 vote)
Essays by the user:

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, nevertheless, really, so, in conclusion, it is true, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1420.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 270.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25925925926 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79784357486 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.607407407407 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 506.74238477 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7293298101 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6666666667 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.26666666667 7.06120827912 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237399557751 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0705157194458 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0656513442336 0.0667982634062 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138412537327 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0509511149136 0.056905535591 90% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.93 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 78.4519038076 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.