“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.
Some educational advocates have prescribed that the optimal teaching method is to praise positive actions and dismiss negative ones. The proponents posit that praising positive behavior will inculcate self-confidence and reinforce such behavior. The praising approach solely structures incentives to encourage students to learn and acquire knowledge. However, this approach hyper-focuses on positive actions and ignores the detriment of negative habits. The best teaching method will focus on incentivizing good action and prevent negative behavior in a classroom setting.
The main qualm with this methodology is that the approach ignores negative behavior. Teachers should structure proportionate punishments in order to avoid detrimental habits. For example, one student may perform benignly through the reward system of shiny stars, while another student may recognize that malignant behavior dissipates without recompense. The bad behaving student may continuously ignore homework students, leading the instructor to enforce punishments to prevent this undesirable action.
Another salient misstep in this approach is that research proves that crucibles contribute to the best learning. According to academics from the Stanford Failure Experiential Lab, undergraduate students are 80% more likely to adjust habits productively in the event of a failure. In respect to their exorbitant successes, the respondents recount their successful events with much less vivid detail and salience than their crucibles. Approximately 75% respondents report that these failures and crises contributed to their best quotidian practices.
The argument for this methodology also ignores that praise is the most efficient approach to reinforcing positive behavior. Academic researcher from Johns Hopkins University John Smith suggests that praising a schoolchild can lead to negative externalities. Despite Pavlovian dog theories, praising children on best efforts can be harmful to children if done improperly. If a schoolteacher praises a child on achievement, researchers find that students in the Baltimore area actually perform 10% worse on the next assignment. The importance is reinforcing the child’s approach to success rather than accomplishments. Teachers should caution, according to Smith, to praise a child with their problem solving and efforts rather than individual achievement. The blowback can be seen in the trophy culture visible today in American academic culture. John Smith recommends that the educators invoke visualization, goal setting, and appraisal of learning methods in order to reinforce positive behavior. His research is continuing to provide invaluable insights into optimal teaching methods in the modern classroom.
In conclusion, the educational research and administrators can optimize teaching in secondary and primary schools by positively reinforcing preferential study habits and negatively reinforcing errant behavior. The best teaching method would focus on reinforcing the efficient study methods and correct deficient behavior.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 508, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nts to prevent this undesirable action. Another salient misstep in this approach...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, second, so, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 58.6224719101 87% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2647.0 2235.4752809 118% => OK
No of words: 430.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 6.15581395349 5.05705443957 122% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1038114011 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553488372093 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 802.8 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.59117977528 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.0552442734 60.3974514979 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 110.291666667 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9166666667 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.21951772744 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12513502395 0.243740707755 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0399651156534 0.0831039109588 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0308947305859 0.0758088955206 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0709591380804 0.150359130593 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0388354183608 0.0667264976115 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.84 48.8420337079 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.1743820225 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.15 12.1639044944 149% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.38706741573 124% => OK
difficult_words: 162.0 100.480337079 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.