{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02453385672227674, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.496815286624204, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Language of the Teacher

terms pervade the language of discourse. Control through linguistic manipulation is evident in the common expression, &dquo;Whose word goes around here?&dquo; This article contends that for purposes of learning and teaching, with its aims of inviting critical thinking and logical argumentation, the language used must be descriptive and neutral, presenting situations and problems objectively. The use of evaluative terms, which is often necessary in professional education, comes only after the problem has been described fully, analyzed rigorously, and understood objectively. To present a learning situation in evaluative terms (especially if they relate to cultural values) before it has been described is to prejudge a situation, and the purpose of learning or thinking is defeated. Teachers, for example, often believe that they are objective, honest, and fair in their presentation to their classes of the facts of Communism or any other socalled controversial issue and that teach-