Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the
claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most
compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The statement above prescribes that payment of a teaching staff should be based on performance of their respective students. The topic generates many mixed emotions and I both agree and disagree to some extent here.
"There is nothing such as a bad student for a good teacher", I have heard this quote numerous times while growing up. We should avoid making the assumption that job of a teacher is similar to that of an accountant, manager, or any other corporates professional. Teaching is never a 'target' based job. The pedagogy system has it's impact on young lives and social aspects. Any person sitting in the classroom is a student, not a target to aim. Implementing the stated suggestion above could revoke two very different and divulged reactions.
Firstly, it could drift the teachers intentions and make them vigorous, in some cases more than needed, in wanting to improve the classroom performance. It could disturb the environment of healthy competition and make education focused only and solely on academics. The intrinsic aspects of education system - the classroom jokes, pushing students towards extra-curricular activities etc. could be endangered. As an example for this- the private coaching institutes in my country, have already implemented such a tactics. And while the results are improving, student have reported of increasing stress, anxiety, lack of social life due to continuous pressure.
The second and completely opposite reactions to this scenario would be improvement of the staff who strive by doing the bare minimum. 'To err is human', and some incompetent teachers prove that they are no god. It could help in monitoring the efforts and keep in check for teachers who in real take teaching as job and complete only the mentioned, sometimes not even that. Evidence for this again could be used from the public schools in rural areas. After urbanization when private schools were in trend many still couldn't afford it. Government employed teachers, in many cases not even took lectures resulting in poor academic results from a particular subject, or from a particular institute for years.
The field of education is dynamic and a vital aspect of our society and future, so imposing static laws would somewhere lead to frictions. In the end, I would conclude my opinion by saying while the given issue could be useful in improving lives of many students, not adding other aspects other than only academic could also hinder creativity and extra classroom expertise and experience for students.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 511, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a tactic' or simply 'tactics'?
Suggestion: a tactic; tactics
... country, have already implemented such a tactics. And while the results are improving, s...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 450, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...from the public schools in rural areas. After urbanization when private schools were ...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 515, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...rivate schools were in trend many still couldnt afford it. Government employed teachers...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, second, so, still, while, such as, in many cases, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2127.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18780487805 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81291514947 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592682926829 0.4932671777 120% => OK
syllable_count: 667.8 704.065955056 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9554346848 60.3974514979 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6818181818 118.986275619 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6363636364 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.04545454545 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.115464335772 0.243740707755 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0353164585844 0.0831039109588 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0386878689795 0.0758088955206 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.075705555626 0.150359130593 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0534797444192 0.0667264976115 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.1392134831 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.