65.Some people believe that the purpose of education is to free the mind and the spirit. Others believe that formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free.
There is a thought provoking debate about whether education can limit our minds or free our minds. From my perspective, education can give us freedom in the process of restraining our spirits.
As a social institution, schools play a role in institutionalizing citizens in order to create and sustain a stable social unit. Like the madhouse Foucault mentioned in Madness and Civilization which is designed to eliminate insanity and sin, schools are to define morality and are devoted to cultivating students with high moral standards. This is to say, those common sense involving what is morality and conventional as well as widely accepted rules are defined by education from schools. As Social Contructionism pointed, social institutions dominate the practice of culture on a day-to-day basis and individuals’ power to oppose or reconstruct important social institutions including schools is limited. For example, we believe patriotism is a kind of virtue, but it is not born to be a virtue, but is constructed to be a virtue by social institutions and then we ordinary people just take it for granted. In conclusion, education continuously restrain our minds by constructing common sense, dictating the rule of the game and correcting the deviant behavior.
At the same time, it is restraints that give us more freedom. According to Rousseau, in the state of nature humans were unwarlike because of their undeveloped reasoning powers and sense of morality and responsibility. When, however, people agreed to surrender individual freedom of action to the general will and establish laws and government, they then became more civilized and there were less conflicts happened. On the one hand, people lost some of their freedom and free will, but on the other hand, they attained more freedom thanks to the stable community. The freedom to steal and to plagiarize which violate others rights is the freedom that we are not supposed to have. By restraining those behavior, we can have the freedom to speak not to worry about name-calling, we can have the freedom to protest not to worry about sticks. Therefore, reasonable restraints can endow us with more freedom.
Back to the point, restraining students’ minds and freeing their minds are not contradictory, instead, they are happened at the same time in the process of educating. Take communication study as an example. When teachers teach students basic theory in the field of communication study like the cultivation theory, a theory holding that the media generally presents an image of the world that does not reflect reality, they have to restrain students’ focus on the particular theory, and students have to follow the train of thought of the teacher rather than contemplating on their own experience that may have conflict with the theory. However, on the other hand, when students successfully grasp the theory, they can utilize the theory as a framework to illustrate a large amount of phenomena in their daily life. For example, people who like watching gang movies tend to believe there are more cases like theft and robbery happened than those happened in reality because media has the power to manufacture an imagined reality. Therefore, although students may be restrained in the process of learning, after understanding the knowledge, they can develop more comprehensive understanding of the inherent reason of one phenomenon and the true nature of the society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 392, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun conflicts is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...en became more civilized and there were less conflicts happened. On the one hand, pe...
^^^^
Line 5, column 696, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this behavior' or 'those behaviors'?
Suggestion: this behavior; those behaviors
...re not supposed to have. By restraining those behavior, we can have the freedom to speak not t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, kind of, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2896.0 2235.4752809 130% => OK
No of words: 553.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23688969259 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99796372463 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 268.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484629294756 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 914.4 704.065955056 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 80.5112068085 60.3974514979 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.904761905 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3333333333 23.4991977007 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52380952381 5.21951772744 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.170507190659 0.243740707755 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0516996224588 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0650383913809 0.0758088955206 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118017852909 0.150359130593 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0672199240208 0.0667264976115 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 146.0 100.480337079 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.