12-Mark Essay: Developing Your Skills

Calculating...

How to Read Your Feedback

The grade on your work is a Projected Grade. It is not your final mark, but an assessment of the skills you have demonstrated. It estimates the score you could achieve in a full-length essay if you applied these same skills consistently throughout. The feedback is designed to help you develop these skills further.

This shows an argument FOR the statement.

This shows an argument AGAINST the statement.

This shows your Conclusion or overall Judgement.

Class Overview: 7C/SEB

Overall Strengths

Good Structure: A majority of students successfully attempted a balanced structure, writing about both sides of the argument before concluding. This is a great foundation.
**Use of Evidence:** Many students correctly identified the importance of the UDHR and some even cited specific articles (like Article 30), which is an excellent way to support an argument.
**Clear Judgements:** Most answers finished with a personal conclusion that directly answered the question.

Areas for Development

Developing Points with Examples: The main area for improvement is moving from stating a point to developing it. Many arguments were simple assertions without a specific "for example..." to make them concrete and convincing.
Considering Nuance: Many answers took an 'all or nothing' approach. The most advanced responses considered proportionality – the idea that the consequence should fit the irresponsibility (e.g. losing *some* rights for serious crimes vs. *all* rights for minor mistakes).
Explanation of Reasoning: Students often stated a good point but didn't explain *why* it was important. Adding a "this means that..." or "this is important because..." sentence is crucial for developing analysis.

Actionable Next Steps

Introduce 'P.E.E.L': A dedicated lesson on the Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link (P.E.E.L.) structure will provide students with a clear framework for building developed paragraphs instead of just listing ideas.
Scenario-Based Debates: Use scenarios to encourage more nuanced thinking. Pose questions like: "A doctor is late for work vs. a doctor amputates the wrong leg. Should the consequences be the same?" This will help them grasp the concept of proportionality.
Model Answer Analysis: Deconstruct the model answer as a class. Focus on how it uses examples and explains its reasoning, and contrast this with some of the simpler answers in the batch to make the 'next step' clear.

Model Answer

12/12

How to get full marks

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Model Answer Breakdown

The question of whether rights should be conditional on responsibilities is a fundamental debate about the nature of justice.This opening sentence shows a strong understanding of the topic and uses sophisticated vocabulary.

On one hand, it can be argued that rights and responsibilities are two sides of the same coin.This is a clear topic sentence for the 'for' argument. The right to live in a safe society, for example, depends on every citizen fulfilling their responsibility not to harm others.This uses a specific example to make a clear point. Therefore, when a person commits a serious crime like murder, they have broken this social contract. In this view, taking away their right to liberty by sending them to prison is a logical and just consequence needed to protect society.This explains the reasoning behind the point, making the argument well-developed.

On the other hand, the principle of universal human rights suggests that rights are inalienable and cannot be taken away, regardless of a person's actions.This is a clear topic sentence introducing the counter-argument. This is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which states that all people are born free and equal.This uses specific evidence (the UDHR) to support the point, adding authority. From this perspective, even a criminal retains their fundamental rights, such as the right not to be tortured. To deny this would be to suggest that some people are less human than others, which is a dangerous path that could lead to abuse of power.This explains the negative consequences of the opposing view, which is a high-level skill.

In conclusion, while it is necessary to remove certain rights like liberty as a punishment for serious crimes, I believe that fundamental human rights must always remain protected.This conclusion is nuanced. It doesn't just agree or disagree but offers a sophisticated middle-ground. A just society is not defined by how it treats its best citizens, but by how it treats its worst. Stripping people of their basic human dignity, no matter their actions, is a form of cruelty that ultimately harms society as a whole.This final sentence provides a powerful, philosophical justification for the conclusion.

Candidate 67192

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because having a responsibility is a big thing where they have rights but also need to focus on things like their jobs.A clear explanation of the link between rights and responsibilities. If someone does the wrong thing people think that they don't deserve human rights because doing something bad isn't a good thing.Good reasoning for the 'for' side.
However some people may strongly disagree with this statement because, even though somebody didn't do the right thing they would still have Rights.Good clear point for the 'disagree' side. People say Rights can't be taken away just because of one mistake that they made.This is a strong argument based on the idea of proportionality.
To conclude, I personally believe that no one should to have their Rights taken away because Right 30: No one can take away your Rights.Excellent! Using a specific article from the UDHR makes your conclusion very strong and evidence-based. This shows that even if someone did something bad they would still have their Rights with them.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You use specific evidence (Article 30 of the UDHR) very effectively to support your conclusion.
You have a clear understanding of both sides of the argument.

Targets

Your points are good, but they are a little abstract. You need to use specific examples to make your arguments more concrete. For example, what is a "wrong thing" someone might do?
Try to develop your points with more explanation. *Why* is it not fair to take rights away for one mistake? Explaining your reasoning adds depth.
You have a great structure and use evidence well. The next step is to add specific examples to bring your excellent arguments to life.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about "one mistake" is great. You could make it even stronger by using a specific example:

I disagree because rights shouldn't be taken away for just one mistake.This is your original, strong point. For example, if a student forgets their homework once, it would be a completely unfair and disproportionate punishment to take away their right to an education.This new part uses a clear, relatable example to show why the punishment wouldn't fit the 'crime'. This shows that there should be smaller consequences for smaller mistakes.This explains the important principle of proportionality.

Candidate 18726

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement, where it says that their rights will be taken if they can't do the right things because if there is a lot of bad things going on and the person keeps doing the same thing over and over again.This is a clear explanation of the 'for' argument, focusing on repeat offenders.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because even if people do the worst things they still should have rights because it's not fair or equal and everyone should have a second try/chance to fix up their behaviour.Good - a clear counter-argument based on the principles of fairness and second chances.
To conclude, I believe that no one should ever have to go through a life with no right or oppotunities to experience because it is unfair and cruel. And everyone has Rights for a reason so it should stay with them unless they repeatedly do something extremly horrible.This is an excellent, nuanced conclusion. It shows you are thinking about the severity of the action, which is a high-level skill.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
Your reasoning is clear for both sides of the argument.
Your conclusion is very sophisticated because it considers nuance (the idea that rights should only be lost for "extremely horrible" and "repeated" actions).

Targets

Your points are good, but they need to be supported with specific examples. What is an example of a "bad thing" someone might do repeatedly? What is an example of something "extremely horrible"?
Try to explain your reasoning in more detail. *Why* is it important to give people a second chance?
You are thinking at a high level, especially in your conclusion. Your next step is to use specific examples to make your arguments more concrete.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your conclusion is great because it's nuanced. You can apply this same thinking to your main paragraphs. For example:

On one hand, I disagree that rights should be taken away for minor issues.This makes your point clearer. For example, if a person is frequently late for work, they should face consequences like a warning, but they should not lose their fundamental human rights. Everyone deserves a second chance to fix their behaviour for smaller mistakes.This uses a specific example to explain your point about second chances.

Candidate 60928

1/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

To conclude, I personally believe intro locate the keyword & define it.This appears to be a planning note rather than an answer. It's good that you are thinking about structure, but you need to write a full answer.

Strengths

It's good that you are thinking about how to structure an essay, like starting with an introduction that defines the keywords.

Targets

You have not written an answer to the question, only a planning note.
To get any marks, you must write sentences and paragraphs that explain your ideas and answer the question asked.
You have the very first step of a plan. Now, try to write the full essay, explaining what you think about the question.

Here's an example of how you could start your answer:

Based on your note, a good first paragraph could look like this:

The keywords in this question are 'rights' and 'responsibilities'. Rights are protections everyone should have, while responsibilities are the duties we have to others.This follows your plan to 'locate the keyword & define it'. I personally believe that people should not lose their rights, even if they fail their responsibilities.This gives your main opinion, which is the next step after the introduction.

Candidate 98716

7/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because, it is important to never neglect things/people who are our responsibilities e.g. a baby, no one should leave a baby unattended, that is classed as neglect.This is an excellent point for the 'agree' side, using a very powerful and clear example.
Some people may strongly disagree because, no one should be stripped of their rights no matter what mistake, stripping people of their rights is unfair and inhumane.Good - a clear counter-argument based on the principle of humane treatment.
To conclude, I personally believe that no one should be stripped of their rights, however punishments must be decided because every neglectful person should face the consequence of their actions because as humans should take more care of our responsibilities instead of neglecting them.This is a very sophisticated conclusion. It makes a clear judgement but also shows nuance by insisting that punishments are still necessary.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You use a very powerful and effective example (neglecting a baby) to make your point.
Your conclusion is excellent and nuanced, arguing against stripping rights but for having other forms of punishment.

Targets

Your 'disagree' paragraph is a little less developed than your 'agree' one. Could you add an example to it?
Try to explain your reasoning in more detail. *Why* is stripping people of rights "unfair and inhumane"? What could happen?
This is a very strong answer with a brilliant conclusion. Adding more detail and examples to your main paragraphs will push it to the top marks.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your conclusion is very sophisticated. You could make it even clearer by giving an example of the kind of punishment you think is appropriate:

To conclude, I believe no one should be stripped of their fundamental rights. However, neglectful people must still face consequences.This is your original, excellent point. For example, a person who neglects their child should lose their right to freedom and be sent to prison, but they should not lose their human right to food, water, and safety while they are there.This new part adds a specific example that clarifies your nuanced argument. Punishments should be serious, but never inhumane.This provides a powerful summary sentence.

Candidate 48716

4/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may disagree with this because it is not right to strip people of their basic rights just because of a mistake, however they should be punished.This shows good nuance, arguing for punishment but against stripping rights.
however some people may agree with this because it is neglect and self-neglect and they should know what they're doing is wrong.Good - you are showing the other side of the argument clearly.
To conclude I personally believe that someone should not be stripped of their rights, however I do personally understand both sides because, naturally we know when something that is our responsibility has been neglected.A reasonable conclusion that shows you have weighed both sides of the argument.

Strengths

You have a good structure, looking at both sides before giving your conclusion.
You show good balanced thinking, acknowledging that you "understand both sides".
You have a clear personal opinion.

Targets

Your points need to be developed with specific examples. What is an example of a "mistake" that should still be punished? What is an example of "neglect"?
Try to explain your reasoning more. *Why* should people be punished? *Why* is it not right to strip them of their basic rights?
You have a good structure and understanding of how to build a balanced argument. Your next step is to add detail and examples to make your points stronger.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about 'neglect' is good. You can make it much more powerful by using a specific example:

Some people agree with the statement, especially in cases of neglect.This is your original point. For example, if a person has a responsibility to care for an elderly relative but neglects them, causing them harm, they have done something seriously wrong.This adds a specific, serious example. In this case, it could be argued that they have forfeited their right to complete freedom and should face legal consequences.This explains what the consequence should be.

Candidate 89170

5/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

People should not lose their rights if they do not fulfill their responsibilities because we are all human beings and we all deserve to be treated equaliy.A clear opening statement for your 'disagree' argument, based on the principle of equality. However, some people may strongly disagree with this statement because if maybe a person stole something they would think that person would go to jail so they dont do it again.It's good that you are trying to show the other side, but this point is a little confused. Jail is the punishment, not the reason for taking rights away.
Some people may strongly agree with this statement because in the U.D.H.R aticle no.1 is says we are all born free and equal.This is an excellent point and you've used a specific article! However, you've used it to support the 'agree' side when it's actually a 'disagree' argument. Be careful to link your evidence to the correct side.
To conclude, I personally believe that people shouldn't lose their humans right.A clear conclusion that states your final opinion.

Strengths

You have attempted to create a balanced structure, looking at both sides.
You have used a specific piece of evidence (UDHR Article 1), which is a high-level skill.
You have a clear final judgement in your conclusion.

Targets

Your arguments are a little confused. You have used a 'disagree' point (UDHR Article 1) to support the 'agree' side. You must be careful to link your evidence to the correct argument.
Your points need to be developed with more explanation. For example, *why* is being "born free and equal" a reason not to lose your rights?
You have some great ideas and evidence, but you need to organise them more logically to build a clear and consistent argument.

Here's an example of how to use your evidence more clearly:

Your point about the UDHR is excellent. Here is how you could use it in a clearer 'disagree' paragraph:

I disagree with the statement because human rights are universal.This is a clear topic sentence. For example, Article 1 of the UDHR says that "we are all born free and equal".This is your excellent evidence. This means that our rights are not something we earn through good behaviour; they belong to us simply because we are human. Therefore, they cannot be taken away, even if we make a mistake.This explains what the evidence means and links it back to the question.

Candidate 61207

8/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because if you do not fufill your purposes (responsibilities) as a person your rights have every need to be taken away.A clear, if slightly circular, point for the 'agree' side.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because if someones rights have to be taken away they won't have the same treatment and equality as someone else, (without favouritism and discrimination).Excellent point, linking the loss of rights to the danger of discrimination. If someones rights as a human have to be forcefully taken away from them, they don't have access to; adequate shelter, clean water, job applications or to live. This could make life a lot harder for the person and not only mentally, but physical hurt themselves.This is an outstandingly well-developed point. You are explaining the severe, real-world consequences of losing rights, which makes your argument very powerful.
To conclude, I strongly believe that no one's rights should be taken away from the person. This act could be taken to court and is shown as discrimination. Every person...deserves dignity, freedom and equality.A very strong and principled conclusion, using excellent vocabulary.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
Your 'disagree' paragraph is exceptional. You explain the potential consequences (loss of shelter, water, etc.) in powerful detail.
You use sophisticated vocabulary accurately ('favouritism', 'discrimination', 'dignity').

Targets

Your 'agree' paragraph is much weaker and less developed than your 'disagree' one. Try to add a specific example to it to make it stronger.
Your conclusion is very good, but it could be even more impactful if it briefly summarised your strongest point about the loss of shelter and clean water.
This is a very high-quality answer. The level of detail in your 'disagree' paragraph is what sets it apart. Excellent work.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your 'agree' paragraph is a bit simple. You could strengthen it with a specific example like this:

Some people agree with the statement because they believe rights are linked to our actions.This is your original point. For example, every citizen has a right to freedom, but they also have a responsibility to follow the law. If a person breaks that responsibility by committing a crime, it is a fair consequence for them to lose their right to freedom by being sent to prison.This new part uses a clear, real-world example to explain the reasoning of the 'for' side.

Candidate 28019 (Script 1)

4/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because they are bad people and they can't be trusted.A simple but clear point for the 'agree' side.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because it is wrong for someone loseing there rights.Good - you are now showing the other side of the argument.
To conclude I personally because believe that that it is wrong for anyone to lose there rights like a serial killer shouldn't lose there rights. or ex primeminister they should not ever ever lose there rights.This is a good conclusion. Using contrasting examples (a serial killer and a prime minister) is a great way to make the point that rights apply to everyone.

Strengths

You have a perfect three-part structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You have a very clear opinion.
Your use of contrasting examples in the conclusion (a prime minister and a serial killer) is a very effective way to make your point about rights being for everyone.

Targets

Your points in the main paragraphs are too simple. You need to develop them with explanations. *Why* can't 'bad people' be trusted? *Why* is it 'wrong' for someone to lose their rights?
You need to use specific examples in your main paragraphs, not just in the conclusion.
You have an excellent structure and a great idea in your conclusion. Now you need to build up the main body of your essay with more detail.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your 'agree' point is a good start. You can develop it by explaining your reasoning, like this:

Some people may strongly agree with the statement because they believe that people who act irresponsibly cannot be trusted with the rights that affect others.This explains the 'why' behind your point. For example, a person who has been convicted of violent crimes has proven they cannot be trusted with the right to freedom, as they pose a danger to the public.This adds a specific example. In this case, taking away their right to liberty by sending them to prison is seen as a necessary consequence.This explains the outcome.

Candidate 28019 (Script 2)

2/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

"some people may strongly agree with this statment because they don't help and that could lead to a bad life.This is a very simple start to the 'agree' argument.
"However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because to be removing it will be concidered not human.This is a simple but potentially powerful point about what it means to be human.
"To conclude I persoanlly belive that everyone get and can't remove rights.A clear conclusion stating your final opinion.

Strengths

You have the correct three-part structure for a discursive essay.
You have a clear point of view in your conclusion.
Your point about taking away rights being 'not human' is a good idea.

Targets

Your answer is far too short and your points are simple statements with no development.
You must explain your points. For example, *why* would not helping lead to a "bad life"? *Why* is removing rights "not human"?
You need to use specific examples to illustrate what you mean.
You have the skeleton of an essay, but you need to add the muscle. Every point needs more detail, explanation, and examples.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your idea about being 'not human' is good. Here is how you could build it into a full paragraph:

However, some people strongly disagree because they believe that taking away someone's rights is like saying they are 'not human' anymore.This clearly states your point. Human rights are the basic protections that everyone gets simply for being a person. If you can lose them, it suggests some people are less human than others.This explains the reasoning. This is a very dangerous idea, because if a government can decide who is 'not human', it can lead to terrible cruelty and abuse.This explains the negative consequences, making it a strong argument.

Candidate 72609

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly disagree with this statement because imagine that someone commited a crime will they lose their rights? Maybe, only if its a serious crime like murder, kidnapping, robbery...Your opening says you disagree, but then you immediately give reasons why you AGREE with taking rights away for serious crimes. This is contradictory. The Judge will decide which fate will they have... So yes, you will lose your rights, if you do not do the right thing, they will be consequeces of your actions for not doing the right thing.You are making a good argument for the 'agree' side here, but it contradicts your opening sentence.

Strengths

You use great, specific examples of serious crimes (murder, kidnapping) and contrast them with non-serious ones (littering).
You show that you are thinking about the idea of proportionality (that the punishment should fit the crime).

Targets

Your argument is very contradictory. You start by saying you 'disagree' but then spend the whole paragraph explaining why you 'agree'. You must have one clear, consistent point of view.
Your answer is one-sided. You need to explain the reasons why someone would disagree with taking rights away.
You are missing a conclusion.
You have some excellent examples, but you need to build them into a clear, structured, and non-contradictory argument.

Here's an example of how to build a clearer argument:

You have the ingredients for a great nuanced conclusion. You need to structure the essay to lead towards it, like this:

In conclusion, I partially agree with the statement, as the consequence should depend on the crime.This is a clear, nuanced judgement. For a non-serious action like 'littering', taking away rights would be unfair. However, for a serious crime like 'murder', a person has failed their responsibilities so badly that it is right for them to lose their right to freedom by going to prison.This uses your own examples to explain your reasoning. Even so, they should keep their basic human rights, like the right to food and not to be tortured.This shows high-level thinking about different types of rights.

Candidate 81670

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly disagree because the people can forget to follow all responsibilites and maybe they've got to much to deal with, like other responsibilites.This is a very good and empathetic point, considering the real-world pressures people face.
However some people may strongly agree to this statement because they might have barely have any responsibilites and they might not care about human rights.Good - you are showing the other side of the argument.
because I strongly disagree because everyone should have human rights and no one should have their rights taken away because even if they made a mistake (like everyone does) they shouldn't be treated differently.A good conclusion that gives a clear judgement and a strong reason based on the principle of equality.

Strengths

You have a good structure, looking at both sides of the argument before concluding.
Your point about people having "too much to deal with" is very insightful and empathetic.
Your conclusion is clear and well-reasoned.

Targets

Your points need to be developed with specific examples. What is an example of a responsibility someone might "forget"? What does it mean to "not care" about rights?
Your sentences are a little long and confusing. Try to use full stops to break your ideas into shorter, clearer sentences.
You have some excellent ideas, especially your point about people being overwhelmed. Your next step is to express these ideas more clearly and back them up with examples.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about people having too much to deal with is excellent. You could make it even stronger by using a specific example:

I disagree because people can forget to follow all their responsibilities, perhaps because they have too much to deal with.This is your original, insightful point. For example, a doctor working a 12-hour shift in a hospital might be too exhausted to remember to pay a bill on time. They have failed a responsibility, but it would be very unfair to take away their rights because of it.This specific, real-world example makes your argument much more powerful and relatable.

Candidate 62791

7/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because Rights were created because their was too much conflict, war, neglectfulness etc. all around the world back then, Rights should be obeyed to respect or treat others the same way they treat you.This is a good point, linking rights to the idea of maintaining social order and respect. People lose their rights if they dont obey them, examples of this are murder, kidnapping, not obeying rules, etc.Excellent use of specific, serious examples to support your argument.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because if someone decides to disobey rights, people think they should lose it... but what people dont know is that those people can change and possibly redeem or regain their rights again.This is a fantastic point for the 'disagree' side, focusing on the important concept of rehabilitation.
To conclude, I personally believe that I disagree with this statement because of how people change throughout life, people may be evil back then or in the past, but they always switch and respect rights as everyone should.A clear and well-reasoned conclusion that logically follows from your point about rehabilitation.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You use strong, specific examples (murder, kidnapping) to support your 'for' argument.
Your 'disagree' argument and conclusion, which focus on the idea that people can "change and redeem," is very thoughtful and sophisticated.

Targets

Your writing is a little hard to read in places. Try to use full stops to create shorter, clearer sentences.
You could develop your point about rehabilitation even further. *Why* is it important for society that people have the chance to change?
This is a very strong and thoughtful answer. Your argument about rehabilitation is a high-level point. Just focus on making your writing a little clearer.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about rehabilitation is excellent. You can develop it further by explaining why it's a good thing for everyone, like this:

I disagree because people who make mistakes should have the chance to change and redeem themselves.This is your original, excellent point. If we take away people's rights forever, we are giving up on them. However, if we allow them to learn from their mistakes through education or therapy in prison, they can be rehabilitated.This explains HOW rehabilitation can work. This is good for society because it means that person can one day return as a responsible citizen, rather than being a permanent problem.This explains WHY it's important.

Candidate 86791

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Someone may agree with this because they belive that if someone does not take care of there own rights which is there resonsiblity they should not have any.A clear, if circular, point for the 'agree' side.
On the other hand some people may disagree because they think that everyone should have rights and that everyone should be equal.Good - a clear explanation of the counter-argument based on equality.
but I think that it dosent mean we should lose them, for example what if you got framed for doing something wrong you wouldnt have the "right" to get a lawer and testify against them.This is an excellent and very clever point for your conclusion, identifying a serious practical flaw in the idea of taking rights away.

Strengths

You have a good structure, looking at both sides before giving a conclusion.
Your concluding point, about the danger of a person being wrongly framed, is a very intelligent and powerful argument.

Targets

Your points in the main paragraphs are very simple and need to be developed with more explanation and examples.
Your conclusion is so strong that it should be your main paragraph for the 'disagree' argument.
Your idea about being 'framed' is a top-level point. Learn to make that the main focus of your argument, and you will get very high marks.

Here's an example of how you could turn your conclusion into a powerful main paragraph:

Your idea about being framed is brilliant. You should make it your main 'disagree' point, like this:

On the other hand, I disagree with the statement because of the danger of people being wrongly accused.This is a strong topic sentence. For example, what if a person was framed for a crime they did not commit?This is your excellent example. If their rights were taken away, they would lose the right to a fair trial and the right to a lawyer. This would mean an innocent person could be punished with no way to defend themselves. This shows why rights must be protected for everyone, to ensure justice is done fairly.This explains the reasoning and dangerous consequences, making it a very powerful argument.

Candidate 20178

8/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

For example if robbing a bank is illegal, no one should get away with robbing a bank or stores with no trouble.This is a clear example of why consequences are necessary for irresponsible actions.
However, some may strongly disagree with this because we have the right to life (article 3). Since we have the right to live, we will have human rights, even if we rob a bank or stab people.Excellent! You are using a specific article from the UDHR to make a very strong counter-argument. On top of that; "We Are All Born Free & Equal." if we are born free and equal, no one should take away our human rights - and that stands on "article 30" "No One Can Take Away Your Human Right."More fantastic use of specific evidence from the UDHR to build a powerful and well-supported argument.
To conclude, I strongly disagree because I stand with the Articles 3, 1 and 30 because they are all from the UDHR. People should always have human rights.A good, clear conclusion that logically follows from the very strong evidence you have presented.

Strengths

Your use of specific evidence (citing multiple UDHR articles) is outstanding and makes your argument incredibly strong.
You have a clear, well-supported point of view.
You have a good structure, looking at both sides before concluding.

Targets

Your 'for' argument is much less developed than your 'against' argument. Try to explain the reasoning for that side in a little more detail.
While your evidence is brilliant, you could add a little more of your own explanation. *Why* is the right to life so fundamental that even a bank robber should keep it?
This is a very high-level answer because of your excellent use of evidence. A slightly more balanced analysis will secure you top marks.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your use of evidence is brilliant. You can make it even better by adding a sentence of your own explanation, like this:

I disagree because we all have a right to life, as stated in Article 3 of the UDHR.This is your excellent point and evidence. This is the most fundamental right of all, and it must be protected for everyone, even for criminals.This new sentence explains WHY this right is so important. To take it away would be to say that some lives are worth less than others, which is a cruel and dangerous idea.This explains the negative consequences of the opposing view.

Candidate 91028

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because if people start war many physical hurting behaviour they should lose their rights for that type of behavior.A good, clear point for the 'agree' side, using a serious example.
However, some strongly disagree with this statement because many people did the wrong thing before we had therapy, prisons. So people that need help can go to and many celebrities or famous people made mistakes they got forgiving twice or once but they still shouldn't lose their rights.This is a very interesting and original point, focusing on the idea of rehabilitation and forgiveness.
To conclude, I personally belive that I disagree because many people make bad descisions... But I also agree with the statement because if someone threatnes or tries to kill you it should not be forgiven but losing your human rights should not be taken away from you.This is a sophisticated but slightly contradictory conclusion. It's good that you see both sides, but you need to form a single, overall judgement.

Strengths

You have a good structure, looking at both sides before the conclusion.
You use interesting and original arguments, especially your point about the existence of therapy and prisons as a way to help people.
You are clearly thinking about the complexity of the issue in your conclusion.

Targets

Your conclusion is a little contradictory. While it's good to see both sides, a conclusion must make a final decision about which side you find *more* convincing.
Try to develop your points with more explanation. *Why* is it important that help like therapy is available? How does that link to the question of rights?
You have some very creative ideas. Your next step is to form a single, clear judgement in your conclusion that weighs up which side is stronger.

Here's an example of how to write a clearer conclusion:

Your conclusion shows you're thinking hard, but it needs one clear decision. You could phrase it like this:

In conclusion, while I agree that serious actions like murder should never be forgiven, I ultimately disagree that a person's fundamental human rights should be taken away.This shows you've weighed both sides but have made a clear final choice. There should be serious punishments, like prison, but as a society, we should focus on help and rehabilitation, like therapy, because this gives people a chance to change and is better than simply being cruel.This summarises your strongest argument.

Candidate 17629

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because rights come with responsibilitys and if you don't fufil them people may think that would lead to the person getting their rights taken away.A good, clear explanation of the 'for' argument, linking rights and responsibilities.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because everyone is born with rights, freedom and equality. So even if the person doesnt fufil the responsilitys people still have freewill.Good - you are now showing the other side of the argument, based on the principle of universal rights.
To conclude I personally disagree because we all people are born equally and we should never be able to 'lose' those righto because the are rightfully ours and nobody should be able to take them away from us.A strong and passionate conclusion that gives a clear judgement and a good reason based on the idea of equality.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You have a clear understanding of the key concepts on both sides of the debate (responsibility vs. equality).
Your conclusion is clear and logically follows from your main argument.

Targets

Your points are good, but they are very abstract. You need to use specific examples to make your arguments more concrete and convincing.
For example, what is a responsibility that, if unfulfilled, might lead to a right being taken away? What is an example of a right that everyone is "born with"?
You have a great structure and a solid understanding. The key to improving your mark is to start using specific examples to support every point you make.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about being "born with rights" is great. You can make it much stronger by adding a specific example:

I disagree because everyone is born with rights, freedom and equality.This is your original, strong point. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the 'right to life'. This is not a right you have to earn; it belongs to you simply because you are a human being.This new part adds a specific, powerful piece of evidence to prove your point. Therefore, it can never be taken away, no matter what mistakes a person makes.This explains what the evidence proves.

Candidate 21067

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because some people might want to be friends with people, they should have the right to hang out with someone different to you. This is because people should have a fair and free world (which is in article 28) so there must be a proper order so we can enjoy rights and freedom everywhere.This is an interesting point, but it seems to be arguing FOR rights, not for taking them away. Be careful to match your point to the question.
However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because some people might get used to not being around different people, so this means that they can think their against them.This is a thoughtful point, linking the idea of taking rights away to the danger of creating prejudice and division.
To conclude, I believe personally agree whith the statement as everybody should be born freely and equaly... Another right that stands out to me is No unfair Detainment in article 9.This conclusion is very contradictory. You say you agree with the statement, but then use evidence (Article 9) that directly disagrees with it.

Strengths

You use specific evidence from the UDHR (Articles 28 and 9), which is a high-level skill.
Your point in the 'disagree' paragraph about creating division is very insightful.
You have attempted to create a balanced structure.

Targets

Your overall argument is very contradictory and confusing. Your 'for' paragraph seems to argue the 'against' point, and your conclusion says you 'agree' but uses evidence to disagree.
You must have one single, clear argument. Decide what you believe *before* you start writing, and make sure every paragraph works to support that one final conclusion.
You have found some excellent evidence, but you are not using it correctly. Plan your argument first, and make sure your evidence supports your points.

Here's an example of how to build a clearer argument:

You have great evidence. Here is how you could use it to build a clear 'disagree' essay:

Introduction: I disagree with the statement because human rights are essential for a fair world.
For Paragraph: Some people might agree, arguing that rights should be taken away as a punishment for bad behaviour.
Against Paragraph: However, I disagree. Article 9 of the UDHR protects us from 'unfair detainment'. This shows that even if someone is accused of doing something wrong, their right to a fair process is protected. This is vital to stop people being punished unfairly.
Conclusion: In conclusion, because of important protections like Article 9, I believe rights cannot be taken away.

Candidate 26190

4/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

I strongly agree because with this statement because lets say your going out and your parent doesn't let you go, you have the right to tell them the reason why you can go and how it might help you.This is a clear example, but it doesn't seem to support the idea of LOSING rights. It seems to be an argument FOR having rights.
However some people might dissagree with this statment because they might be thinking "Oh your to young you should not be going out at that small age".This is another clear point, but again, it seems to be part of a different debate about parental rules, not about losing fundamental human rights.
But, to conclude, I personally belive that every one has and needs rights to help understand responsability and how it would help you be more of a person where people respect you and give you a chance for every thing.This is a good conclusion that links rights and responsibilities. So if I was to say only boys can go to school "why can't girls", girls have the right to defend them self and go to school no matter the cost.This is an excellent, powerful example to use in your conclusion.

Strengths

You have a clear three-part structure.
Your conclusion is very strong, especially the powerful and well-chosen example about girls' right to education.

Targets

Your main paragraphs are not focused on the question. The question is about losing fundamental human rights for failing responsibilities (like breaking the law), not about disagreements with parents.
You need to make sure your arguments and examples are directly relevant to the topic of the essay.
Your conclusion shows you have some excellent ideas. Your main challenge is to make sure the rest of your essay is focused on the actual question being asked.

Here's an example of how to make your argument more relevant:

Your example about girls' education is brilliant. You should use it as the main point in your 'disagree' paragraph, like this:

I disagree that rights should be taken away, because they are essential for equality.This is a strong topic sentence. For example, girls have the right to go to school, no matter what. Some people in the past might have said girls don't have this right, but this is a form of discrimination.This uses your excellent example. The right to education is a universal human right that belongs to everyone, and it cannot be taken away. This shows that rights are more important than people's old-fashioned opinions.This explains what the example proves.

Candidate 26897

1/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

The key word is rights. Some people may slightly agree with this statment. They might think that you have one chance and only one.These are good starting points for an argument, but they are just notes.
However from some might think that you have as many chances as you like. A right that is you love is you are born with human rights is for every one.Again, these are good ideas for the 'disagree' side, but they are not written in full sentences.
To conclude... I personally think that they should have human rights even if you do something wrong.This shows you have a clear final opinion.

Strengths

You have correctly identified the main ideas for both sides of the argument (one chance vs. many chances; rights are for everyone).
You have the right three-part structure for an essay.
You have a clear final opinion.

Targets

Your answer is written as a series of notes, not in full sentences and paragraphs. To get marks, you must write a proper essay.
You need to develop your points with explanations and examples. *Why* might someone only get one chance? *Why* are human rights for everyone?
You have a good plan. Now you need to turn that plan into a full piece of writing. Focus on writing in complete sentences.

Here's an example of how to turn your notes into a full paragraph:

You can turn your notes into a full paragraph by joining them together and adding more detail, like this:

However, other people would disagree.This is the topic sentence. They believe that you should have many chances in life, not just one, because human rights are for every one.This turns your notes into a full sentence. For example, even if a person makes a mistake and breaks the law, they still have the right to a fair trial. This is because rights belong to people from birth and cannot be taken away.This adds an example and an explanation to develop the point.

Candidate 29761

6/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because some people in this world are very weird people that do horrible stuff in this world and people can agree and they would want the world to be tough on a human that to do bad things.A clear and well-explained point for the 'agree' side.
However some may strongly disagree because some people might have dissabilities that strongly breakes there self as a human and may not know what is going on wile there right are being remove.This is a very insightful and empathetic point, considering how vulnerable people with disabilities might be. for an example "you have dislexcia and you go to jail for a reason and they say your right will be remove..."This is a powerful, though slightly confused, example. The core idea is very strong.
to conclude I personally disagry why people should lose there right because if they have a mental helth problem... then it would be very unfair to the people that have problems.A good conclusion that summarises your strongest and most unique argument.

Strengths

You have a clear three-part structure.
Your 'disagree' argument is outstanding. Considering the impact on people with disabilities or mental health problems is a very sophisticated and empathetic approach.
You have a clear point of view in your conclusion.

Targets

Your 'agree' paragraph is much simpler than your 'disagree' one. Try to add a specific example to it to make it stronger.
Your handwriting and spelling make your answer quite difficult to read in places. Focus on making your letters clear.
Your argument about disabilities is a brilliant, high-level point. If you can make all your points that clear and well-argued, you will get a top mark.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about disabilities is excellent. You could make it even clearer and more powerful like this:

However, I strongly disagree because taking rights away would be very unfair to people with disabilities or mental health problems.This is a strong, clear topic sentence. For example, a person with a learning disability might not understand a complex rule and break it by mistake. They have failed a responsibility, but not on purpose.This provides a very clear and specific example. To take away their fundamental human rights for something they could not help would be incredibly cruel and unjust. This shows why rights must be for everyone, to protect the most vulnerable.This explains the reasoning and makes the argument very powerful.

Candidate 81672

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly agree with this statement because for instance if I'm not giving a child the right to seek a safe place to live, they should lose my right theirs as well because you can't take a right from someone and still be entitled.This is a complex but interesting point about the reciprocal nature of rights. If someone decides I'm not going to work but still getting paid they should lose their right to, workers rights, the right to play.This is another good, specific example for the 'for' side.
So this means that the effort you dont put in takes your right to a better life. This ensures that if you show hardwork. The right to your own things you could lose.You are making a good point here, but the answer ends very abruptly.

Strengths

You use some interesting and specific examples to support your arguments (a parent's duty, a worker's duty).
You have a clear point of view.
You understand the link between rights and responsibilities.

Targets

Your answer is entirely one-sided. To get a high mark in a discursive essay, you **must** also explain the other side of the argument.
You need to add a paragraph explaining why someone might *disagree* with the statement, and then write a conclusion that weighs up both sides.
Your answer ends very suddenly. Make sure you write in full paragraphs and finish with a proper conclusion.
You are good at thinking of examples. Now you need to build them into a balanced essay structure (For, Against, Conclusion).

Here's an example of how you could improve your answer:

You have made a good case for the 'agree' side. To make it a balanced essay, you must also include the 'disagree' side, like this:

However, other people would strongly disagree with this statement.This introduces the counter-argument. They believe that human rights are universal and belong to everyone, no matter what. For example, the UDHR states that everyone has the right to life.This uses evidence to make a strong point. This right cannot be taken away even if a person is irresponsible, because it is a fundamental part of being human.This explains the reasoning.

Candidate 86791

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Someone may agree with this because they belive that if someone does not take care of there own rights which is there resonsiblity they should not have any.A clear, if circular, point for the 'agree' side.
On the other hand some people may disagree because they think that everyone should have rights and that everyone should be equal.Good - a clear explanation of the counter-argument based on equality.
but I think that it dosent mean we should lose them, for example what if you got framed for doing something wrong you wouldnt have the "right" to get a lawer and testify agains them.This is an excellent and very clever point for your conclusion, identifying a serious practical flaw in the idea of taking rights away.

Strengths

You have a good structure, looking at both sides before giving a conclusion.
Your concluding point, about the danger of a person being wrongly framed, is a very intelligent and powerful argument.

Targets

Your points in the main paragraphs are very simple and need to be developed with more explanation and examples.
Your conclusion is so strong that it should be your main paragraph for the 'disagree' argument.
Your idea about being 'framed' is a top-level point. Learn to make that the main focus of your argument, and you will get very high marks.

Here's an example of how you could turn your conclusion into a powerful main paragraph:

Your idea about being framed is brilliant. You should make it your main 'disagree' point, like this:

On the other hand, I disagree with the statement because of the danger of people being wrongly accused.This is a strong topic sentence. For example, what if a person was framed for a crime they did not commit?This is your excellent example. If their rights were taken away, they would lose the right to a fair trial and the right to a lawyer. This would mean an innocent person could be punished with no way to defend themselves. This shows why rights must be protected for everyone, to ensure justice is done fairly.This explains the reasoning and dangerous consequences, making it a very powerful argument.

Candidate 90768

3/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Intro: People should lose their rights if they do not fufil their responsibilites this is because everybody needs to take care or work hard for something to earn it.This is a clear introduction that defines the 'for' side of the argument well.
Agree Point: some people may strongly agree with this statement because people need to take care of someone or something or even do something to earn rights and everyone needs to work hard for something for a reason.This is a good explanation of the 'for' argument, but it is very repetitive of your introduction.
Disagree point: However some people may serongly disagree with this because some people can't do this on doesn't have the time or they might be busy with something which is not their fault because for an example parents who don't have money it isn't their fault they don't have food for their child.This is an excellent and empathetic point for the 'disagree' side, supported by a strong example.
Conclusion: To conclude I personally beleive that this is a true and right statement.This conclusion is very weak and contradicts the excellent point you made in your 'disagree' paragraph.

Strengths

You have used a very clear essay plan structure (Intro, Agree, Disagree, Conclusion).
Your 'disagree' point about poverty and parents is very insightful and well-explained.

Targets

Your 'agree' point is too repetitive of your introduction. Try to make a new point in each section.
Your conclusion is very weak and contradicts your strongest argument. A good conclusion should be a summary of your best point.
Your point about poverty is excellent. You need to make that the focus of your answer and build your conclusion around it, rather than just ignoring it at the end.

Here's an example of how to write a better conclusion:

Your conclusion should reflect your strongest argument. Based on your 'disagree' point, a much better conclusion would be:

To conclude, although some believe rights should be earned, I personally disagree with the statement.This makes a clear judgement that matches your best point. As I argued, sometimes people cannot fulfil their responsibilities for reasons that are not their fault, such as parents who are in poverty.This summarises your strongest argument. It would be incredibly unfair and cruel to take away their rights and punish them for a situation they cannot control.This provides a powerful final thought.

Candidate 96718

2/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Yes it is true if people can't help or do eveything then they are not a good persson but if there is that kind and they should treat us all fairly.This point is a little confusing, but it shows you are thinking about fairness. And nobody has the right to put us in perison and trust and seeport people like your mum or dad.This is a strong point based on the idea of fundamental rights that no one can take away.

Strengths

You have a clear point of view (disagreeing with the statement).
You have a strong point about certain rights (like not being imprisoned without cause) being absolute.

Targets

Your answer is very short and the points are not clearly explained or structured. You need to write in full paragraphs.
Your answer is entirely one-sided. To get a good mark, you must explain the 'for' argument as well, even if you don't agree with it.
You need to use specific examples to make your points clearer.
You have the beginning of a good idea. Your next step is to build it into a full essay with a balanced structure (For, Against, Conclusion).

Here's an example of how to build your ideas into a full essay:

You have a good starting point. Here is how you could structure it as an essay:

For Paragraph: Some people agree with the statement. They believe that if a person acts irresponsibly and breaks the law, they should lose their right to freedom and be sent to prison to protect others.
Against Paragraph: However, I disagree. As you said, nobody has the right to just put someone in prison. We have a right to a fair trial, and this right is universal. It cannot be taken away, because it protects innocent people and ensures justice is fair.
Conclusion: In conclusion, I disagree with the statement because fundamental rights, like the right to a fair trial, must be protected for everyone to keep society safe and just.

Candidate 79012

5/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may strongly disagree with this statement because in the UDHR says "no one can take your rights". Even if its the queen or king trys to take away your rights.Excellent! A very strong start to your essay, using specific evidence from the UDHR to make a powerful point.
Some people may strongly agree with this statement because maybe the person might not know about the Rights of people and themselves.This is an interesting point, but it feels more like a reason to disagree with the statement. If someone doesn't know their responsibilities, is it fair to punish them?
To conclude I personally believe that people should know there Right and should read the UDHR which "no one can take your rights".A good conclusion that logically follows from your strongest point.

Strengths

Your use of the UDHR as evidence is excellent and makes your 'disagree' argument very strong.
You have attempted to create a balanced structure.
You have a clear point of view in your conclusion.

Targets

Your 'agree' paragraph is very weak and seems to contradict the point you are trying to make. You need a clear and logical point for the 'for' side.
You need to develop your points with more explanation. *Why* is the UDHR so important? Why is it a powerful argument?
Your use of evidence is great. Your main task now is to ensure all your points are logical and that you explain your reasoning in more detail.

Here's an example of how you could write a stronger 'agree' paragraph:

Your 'disagree' argument is great. You need an 'agree' paragraph that is just as clear, like this:

On the other hand, some people agree with the statement because they see rights and responsibilities as being linked.This is a clear topic sentence. They would argue that the right to be protected by society only exists if you fulfil your responsibility to not harm society. For example, if you break the law by stealing, you have acted irresponsibly.This provides a clear example. Therefore, it is fair that you should lose some of your rights, like your right to freedom, as a consequence.This explains the logic of the argument.

Candidate 79862

4/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

Some people may agree with this statement because if you break the law you lose some of your rights in prison like you have the rights no matter where you go because if your in prison you dont have the right of "freedom".This is a very good point for the 'agree' side, using a strong and specific example.
On the other hand some people may disagree with this statement because of Right (30) in the UDHR "no one can take away your Rights".Excellent! You are now showing the other side of the argument and supporting it with specific evidence.
To conclude I disagree that if you do not do your responsibilities you shouldent lose your rights because of Right (30).A good, clear conclusion that logically follows from your evidence.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
You use excellent, specific evidence on both sides of the argument (loss of freedom in prison vs. UDHR Article 30).
You have a clear point of view that is well-supported by your evidence.

Targets

Your points are great, but they need more development and explanation. For example, *why* is it fair to lose the right to freedom in prison? And *why* is Article 30 so important?
Your answer is a little short. Adding more explanation will help you to write in more detail and get more marks.
You have found the perfect examples and evidence. Your next step is to explain the reasoning behind your points in more detail.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about UDHR Article 30 is excellent. You could develop it further by explaining *why* it is so important, like this:

On the other hand, I disagree because Article 30 of the UDHR states that "no one can take away your rights".This is your original, excellent point. This is a crucial principle because it ensures everyone is protected by a baseline of human dignity.This new part explains the 'why' - the reasoning behind the rule. If rights could be taken away, it might lead to abuse of power where people are punished in cruel and inhumane ways. Therefore, this article protects everyone.This explains the dangerous consequences if the rule didn't exist.

Candidate 76089

7/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

However, some may strongly disagree with this statement because, article seven in the UDHR "Were all equal before the law". In addition Article twenty-Eight says "a fair and free world".Excellent start, using multiple pieces of specific evidence from the UDHR to build a strong argument.
Same people may strongly agree with this statement because, article three "the right to life". We all have the right to life and to live in freedom and safety.This is another great piece of evidence, but it seems to support the 'disagree' side rather than the 'agree' side. Be careful to link your evidence to the correct argument.
In conclusion I think that all rights should stay the same even for a normal citizens rights should never ever change no matter the cost because we all have the Right.A clear and passionate conclusion that gives your final judgement.

Strengths

Your use of multiple, specific articles from the UDHR is an outstanding, high-level skill.
You have a clear point of view and a good three-part structure.
You clearly understand the core principles of human rights.

Targets

Your argument is a little confused because you use evidence for the 'disagree' side (the right to life) in your 'agree' paragraph. You must make sure your evidence supports the point you are making.
You need to explain your points in more detail. *How* does being "equal before the law" mean that rights can't be taken away? Explain the connection.
Your use of evidence is brilliant. Your main task now is to build a clearer, more logical argument around it, ensuring each piece of evidence supports the right point.

Here's an example of how to build a clearer argument:

You have all the right evidence. You just need to organise it logically. Here is how you could structure your 'disagree' paragraph:

I strongly disagree with the statement, based on several articles in the UDHR.This is a strong topic sentence. Firstly, Article 7 states we are all "equal before the law," which suggests that our basic rights cannot be taken away, as this would make us unequal.This explains your first piece of evidence. Furthermore, Article 3 guarantees the "right to life." This is the most fundamental right of all and cannot be conditional on our behaviour. Even if a person is a criminal, they are still a human and have a right to life.This explains your second piece of evidence, creating a very strong, well-supported paragraph.

Candidate 68927

7/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

one may strongly agree with this statement as they could argue that we have a duty or responsibility to protect ours and others rights.A good, clear point for the 'agree' side, based on the idea of a social duty. Additionally, if a person is not respecting people and their surroundings then they do not deserve the freedom of the rights.Good development of the point.
on the other hand, many might believe that the responsibilities aren't required to keep your rights. As one could say even if the person isn't following their duties, they are still human and deserve a basic level of respect.Excellent - a clear explanation of the counter-argument, focusing on the idea that rights are inherent to being human. Additionally article 30 of the UDHR says that the rights of a person shouldn't be taken away from them.Great use of specific evidence to support your point.
To conclude, I personally believe that rights aren't earned, they are guranteed, however it would still be better to uphold the responsibilities that come with it.This is a fantastic, nuanced conclusion. It gives a clear judgement but also acknowledges the importance of the other side of the argument.

Strengths

You have a perfect essay structure: for, against, and a conclusion.
Your conclusion is particularly strong and sophisticated, as it gives a clear judgement while still acknowledging the importance of responsibility.
You use specific evidence (Article 30) effectively.

Targets

Your points are very good, but they are a little abstract. The single biggest thing you can do to improve is to add a specific "for example..." to each of your main paragraphs.
What is an example of a duty we have to "protect others"? What is an example of a "basic level of respect" a criminal should still get?
This is a very well-reasoned and thoughtful answer. Adding specific, real-world examples will elevate it to the top marks.

Here's an example of how to strengthen a point:

Your point about a 'basic level of respect' is great. You could make it more concrete with an example, like this:

I disagree because even if a person isn't following their duties, they are still human and deserve a basic level of respect.This is your original, excellent point. For example, a person who has committed a crime and is in prison has failed their responsibilities. However, they still have the human right not to be tortured.This new part adds a powerful, specific example. This shows that even for criminals, there is a basic level of humane treatment that should always be guaranteed.This explains what the example proves.

Candidate 77916

2/12

'People should lose their rights, if they do not fulfil their responsibilities (If they do not do the right thing)'

Transcribed Answer

I personally believe that is responsibilities aren't fuciled, rights should still apply because no one is perfect and if rights were taken away many people, mainly children would starve and die on the streets.This is a strong concluding statement with a powerful emotional point, but it's presented without any build-up.

Strengths

You have a very clear and strong personal opinion.
Your point about the severe consequences of taking rights away (starvation) is a powerful argument.

Targets

Your answer is only a conclusion. A discursive essay must look at both sides of the argument before you give your final judgement.
You need to add a paragraph explaining why someone might *agree* with the statement, and another paragraph explaining in more detail why you *disagree*.
You need to develop your points with more explanation and evidence.
You have the ending of a great essay. Now you need to go back and write the beginning and the middle!

Here's an example of how to build the full essay:

To build a full answer, you need to add paragraphs explaining the 'for' and 'against' arguments before your conclusion, like this:

Paragraph 1 (For): Some people agree with the statement because they believe rights come with duties. For example, if you don't fulfil your duty to follow the law, you should lose your right to freedom.
Paragraph 2 (Against): However, other people disagree because rights are universal. Taking away rights like the right to food or shelter would be cruel and could lead to people starving, as you said in your conclusion.
Your Conclusion: Therefore, I believe rights should still apply...