Years ago a John Hopkin's professor gave a group of graduate students this  _ : Go to the slums . Take 200 boys, between the ages of 12 and 16, and investigate their backgrounds and environment. Then predict their chances for the future.  The students, after consulting social statistics, talking to the boys and working out data, concluded that 90 percent of the boys would spend some time in prison.  Twenty-five years later another group of graduate students was given the job of testing the prediction. They went back to the same area. Some of the boys--by then men--were still there. A few of them had died and some had moved away, but they got in touch with 180 of the original 200. They found that only four of the group had ever been sent to prison.  Why was it that these men, who had lived in a breeding  place of crime, had such a surprisingly good record? The researchers were continually told: "Well, there was a teacher."  They pressed further, and found that in 75 percent of the cases it was the same woman. The researchers went to this teacher, now living in a home for retired teachers. How had she made this remarkable influence over that group of children? Could she give them any reason why these boys should have remembered her?  "No," she said, "I really couldn't." And then, thinking back over the years, she said thoughtfully, more to herself than to her questioners: "I loved those boys." This is just the reason. The first group of graduates sent to the slums drew a conclusion of the 200 boys that   _  .
most boys were sure to commit a crime in the future. all of the boys were certain to be in prison in the future. most boys were to work in prison in the future. few of the boys were to be sent to prison