Sciences Po 2022 : corrigé d’anglais sur la police

Proposition de corrigé — non officielle. Concours commun des IEP 2022 : réponses en anglais et essai sur le financement et la réforme de la police.

Télécharger ce corrigé en PDF · Ouvrir le sujet officiel · Télécharger une copie du sujet · Retrouver les annales

Compréhension : réponses proposées en anglais

1. How can support for the police coexist with demands for reform?

Residents may want officers to protect them from violence while rejecting unfair treatment and excessive force. Supporting policing does not mean approving every police practice. The survey therefore reveals a demand for both safety and accountability rather than a simple choice between keeping and abolishing the police.

2. Why do Black and Latino residents distrust the police more?

According to the article, their experiences differ from those of white residents. They are more likely to associate police encounters with racial bias, mistreatment or fear of retaliation. These experiences can weaken trust even when people still need protection against crime.

3. Why is collecting data useful?

Data helps identify differences between communities and distinguish common concerns from assumptions about what residents want. It can reveal support for particular reforms and guide priorities. However, one local survey cannot automatically represent every American city or prove which policy will work.

4. What is meant by a disproportionate burden?

The expression refers to unequal exposure to the negative consequences of policing. If some racial groups face more discriminatory treatment or fear, they carry a heavier burden than others. The argument concerns unequal experiences, not merely different personal opinions.

5. Could a more representative police force help?

A force whose members better reflect the population might improve communication and make residents feel understood. Yet representation alone would not remove unfair practices. Training, supervision, transparent investigations and effective accountability would still be necessary.

Expression écrite : proposition d’essai

Is redistributing police funding desirable and realistic?

Police funding should be discussed in relation to the services people actually need. A safer city is not simply a city with more officers. It is also a place where a person in distress can receive suitable help and where residents can report a crime without fearing discrimination.

Redistributing part of a police budget can therefore be desirable. Some situations involve homelessness, mental health difficulties or conflicts that do not initially require an armed response. Funding trained crisis teams, social support and prevention may address causes that police officers cannot solve alone. This approach would also allow officers to focus on serious violence and investigations.

However, redistribution should not mean abandoning protection. A social worker cannot safely replace an officer in every emergency. Nor will changing a budget automatically remove racism or excessive force. Clear rules, independent complaints procedures and reliable supervision remain essential. Cutting resources before alternative services are available could leave vulnerable residents with less help.

A realistic reform would proceed gradually. The city could identify suitable calls, provide specialist teams and define when police backup is needed. It should then examine response times, safety, unequal treatment and whether people obtain lasting support. Residents and front line workers should contribute to this assessment, including those whose experiences are often overlooked.

I would therefore support targeted redistribution rather than a general cut made to satisfy a slogan. Its success depends on organisation as much as money. The aim should be to provide the right response, preserve necessary protection and reduce avoidable harm. A budget is a means of achieving these goals, not a substitute for deciding what fair and effective public safety should involve. Reform should earn trust through visible results and remain open to correction when its effects differ from expectations.

Repères

Le texte porte sur un sondage à Chicago publié en 2021, et non sur une mesure actuelle de l’opinion américaine. Dans l’essai, les équipes et modalités proposées sont des choix argumentés, pas des dispositifs dont le texte établirait déjà les résultats.