The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Is solely providing positive reinforcement while ignoring negative actions the most effective teaching philosophy? I would argue that the correct philosophy is dependent on the content, context, and your audience.
For younger children, I believe praising positive actions is definitely better than correcting negative ones, because they have not yet developed the ability to infer the reasons behind what they are told. For example, when my little brother was first learning to count, he would always go straight from 4 to 6, skipping 5 in the middle. So, every time he would say 4, I would remind him that the next number was “not six”. Of course, this only made him learn that you counted 3,4,5,not 6, and 6! He hadn’t yet realized “not 6” meant there was a different, correct answer. Furthermore, as younger children often reach out for attention, giving any reaction, especially an emotional one, to their bad behavior only encourages them to repeat it.
As children grow older, the situation becomes more nuanced. It is certainly well established that in academic matters, positive reinforcement is the better method because students feel more motivated and encouraged by their teachers, mentors, and parents. However, when it comes to social or moral issues, it is equally important to acknowledge and punish negative actions, since the students may often pick those up from people around them and fail to realize that their actions are harmful or can have consequences. For example, the problem of systemic sexism problems arises from young boys learning from their homes, friends, or media to disregard women’s freedom of choice and facing no consequences for stalking or harassing fellow classmates, to the point they fail to even realize the error of their ways. To fix such an issue, it is important to set up systems that acknowledge and punish negative actions at every turn, not just when they have escalated out of control.
Similarly, on a government level, where issues are often matters of public action and safety, positive reinforcement is simply insufficient by itself. We’re currently facing a pandemic and simply encouraging people to stay at home is insufficient until it is supplemented by tracing methods, laws, fines, and jail times to punish offenders, which actively forces people to follow through on lockdown measures. This is clearly evident when comparing the smaller relative efficiency of countries like Singapore, which have significantly higher punitive action, to countries like USA, which rely on encouraging their citizens rather than punishing them.
Thus, praising positive actions is definitely the best way to teach individuals facts, abilities, or individual skills, especially for younger children. However, when trying to teach societies or imparting moral or social norms, punishing negative actions is just as crucial to bringing an effective change.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 732, Rule ID: FELLOW_CLASSMATE[1]
Message: Use simply 'classmates'.
Suggestion: classmates
... consequences for stalking or harassing fellow classmates, to the point they fail to even realize...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, similarly, so, thus, well, while, for example, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2471.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 458.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39519650655 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77110365468 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589519650655 0.4932671777 120% => OK
syllable_count: 748.8 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.8210083536 60.3974514979 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.352941176 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.9411764706 23.4991977007 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52941176471 5.21951772744 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192806605954 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0574523075737 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0514784036926 0.0758088955206 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110225468021 0.150359130593 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371009276216 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.