ফিরে যান ISE IV English (UK) – Interactive task

Predictive Policing in High-Crime Areas

ইংরেজি কথা বলার দৃশ্যপট

Libby

A bright British English speaker with an approachable, conversational tone.

32 years · female

Practise talking about "Predictive Policing in High-Crime Areas" with Libby, your AI speaking avatar. Speak out loud, get instant feedback, and build confidence for your ISE IV English – Interactive task speaking exam.

Start free AI practice

কথোপকথন

I am going to give you a situation. Police propose predictive tools to allocate patrols in high-crime areas. You need to ask questions and then tell me what you think should happen. What do you need to know first?

ভাল উত্তর:

I would need to know where the power sits before giving a view. In this case, police propose predictive tools to allocate patrols in high-crime areas. I would ask who benefits immediately, who bears the risk if the judgement is wrong, and whether affected people can appeal or demand reasons. Without those answers, the proposal may sound efficient while concealing the risk of risk scores replacing accountable human judgement.

The main options are use prediction with audits and community oversight or focus on non-police prevention before predictive tools. What assumption behind these options would you challenge?

ভাল উত্তর:

The weakest assumption, in my view, is that use prediction with audits and community oversight and focus on non-police prevention before predictive tools are the only realistic moral choices. They may be useful starting points, but the real decision may require a narrower pilot, a stronger appeal route or a different definition of success. Otherwise we may choose between two polished versions of the same blind spot.

Suppose someone says your approach is too cautious and that urgent action is needed. How would you respond?

ভাল উত্তর:

I would concede that waiting for perfect evidence is not responsible either. I would allow action where the current harm is clear, but I would limit scale, publish reasons and set a review date. That responds to pressure without pretending the risk has disappeared, especially when the policy could lead to the risk of risk scores replacing accountable human judgement.

What long-term consequence worries you most if this decision is handled badly?

ভাল উত্তর:

The long-term risk that worries me most is institutional habit. Once organisations build procedures around a decision, reversing it becomes expensive, embarrassing and politically difficult. In predictive policing in high-crime areas, the risk of risk scores replacing accountable human judgement could start to feel normal rather than exceptional, which is more damaging than a single poor decision.

Where should responsibility sit: individuals, institutions, markets or government?

ভাল উত্তর:

I would separate moral responsibility from operational responsibility. Government should set enforceable limits, institutions should explain and monitor decisions, and private actors should not profit from risks they do not carry. Individuals need voice, but voice is not a substitute for power or an appeal mechanism. For predictive policing in high-crime areas, that qualification keeps the answer tied to the actual case.

After hearing the objections, what final position would you take?

ভাল উত্তর:

My final answer would depend on whether the safeguards are enforceable. I would not give a pure yes or no answer. I would allow the least irreversible action that addresses the immediate harm, but only with published reasons, independent review and a real route for people to challenge outcomes that affect them. For predictive policing in high-crime areas, that qualification keeps the answer tied to the actual case.