Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society.
__________
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented above.
Children absorb everything they are taught. At school apart from academics, what is wrong and what is right must be taught. According to the author, some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education while others believe that teaching logical reasoning would produce a moral society. I somewhat side with the people who believe that morality should be the foundation of education for the following reasons.
Children are extremely impressionable. They need to be directed in the right direction from a young age. They must be able to tell the right apart from the wrong. If they are not taught to do so, they might grow up to be immoral adults. That is something that is not good for the progress of the human kind. Imparting moral reasoning into the education system would teach one the difference between what is right and what is wrong from a very young age. For example, if a class based on moral reasoning is assigned to students even just once a week, where they are taught about what is right and what is wrong and how doing the wrong will have a negative impact it would do wonders in the moral growth of the child.
When it comes to logical reasoning being taught as a substitute for moral reasoning, then students will run into problems. Everything that is logically correct is not morally right. In some situations, things that may seem logically right might be morally wrong. In such circumstances the child who has been taught logical reasoning may take wrong decisions. For example, a person who has been taught a foundation of logical reasoning in place of moral reasoning is faced with a situation where he/she must run over a cat with a car or crash the car into a tree. Logically it would make sense to run over the cat since crashing the car into a tree is expensive and would involve repairs. This would also mean that the car would be out of service. But morally, running over the cat would mean taking a life. And that is a bad thing to do. In these kinds of circumstances, logical reasoning would prove to be immoral.
While Logical reasoning should be taught as a part of the curriculum, it cannot be substituted for moral reasoning. This is why I have to agree with the people who believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, so, then, while, apart from, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1908.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 407.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.68796068796 5.05705443957 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53502649891 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 215.323595506 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.427518427518 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 585.9 704.065955056 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.8789875323 60.3974514979 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.9565217391 118.986275619 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6956521739 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.60869565217 5.21951772744 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.326743115661 0.243740707755 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108168274081 0.0831039109588 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122399878937 0.0758088955206 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261091285133 0.150359130593 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.115379220593 0.0667264976115 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.5 14.1392134831 67% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 48.8420337079 146% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 12.1743820225 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.63 12.1639044944 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.81 8.38706741573 81% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 100.480337079 60% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.7820224719 59% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.