A recent IELTS writing Question: Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later. Some people think that they are the best people to talk to school students the danger of committing a crime. Do you agree or disagree? My composition: As the education to students on conforming to orders and laws has been laid more emphasis, some people who used to be criminals are considered to walk into the schools and inform the danger of committing crimes to students. Opinions vary from people to people on whether these reformed “criminals” are suitable to teach school students. From my perspective, I approve of these people sharing their experience with school students to some extent. To begin with, it is undoubtedly the most persuasive way to inform students of staying away from criminal actions. These reformed people can teach students what to do and what are not supposed to do. They even can share their motives of committing crimes to prevent the students from thinking like that. Next, for these reformed people, this opportunity of teaching students is also an encouragement and recognition from the society, which implies the society still trust and care about them. In addition, if the whole thing happens, students will get to know the positive side of the society by seeing the old criminals turning into good citizens, thus having more faith in the society. Judging from the flip side, I still can see some drawbacks if these people go back to schools. After all, they committed crimes, so, even though these people have reformed and been out of jail, common people’s impressions towards them are difficult to change in a short time. I believe many people would feel scared if a person who went to prison shows up in front of them even if he/she has been out of it. Once the fear arises among students, they tend to resist anything from that person, which will bring about an unsuccessful sharing meeting. In conclusion, I suggest that schools can invite reformed “criminals” to have a meeting with students but they should think twice before they choose the suitable person to ensure the quality of the sharing meeting and to prevent bad consequence it might bring about. (Can a native speaker possibly revise it for me? I would be appreciate if you can point out my problems in logicality, lexicology and grammar. Thank you :) )