Teacher’s salaries should be based on their students’ academic performance
Even though the basic principle as being a teacher is the ability to properly encourage, conduct, and evaluate the students, salaries should be handled in a different dynamic due to the potential risks of harsh competence not only among students but also teachers. That is, the costs could be greater than the benefits when the students’ performance becomes a definitive factor in deciding one’s salary. This essay is going to argue possible misleadings of implementing the policies as shown in the statement.
Firstly, if the salaries are decided according to the students’ performance, the teachers are likely to favor those who have advanced grades over the neglected ones who have some difficulty in adapting to the school system. That may not be due to a personal predilection, considering the fact that if their salaries go down then the teachers would probably lose their basic elements of living.
Admittedly, in principle it is the teacher’s responsibility to enhance students’ general attitudes and performances in classrooms. Teachers are obliged to be adept and vigilant enough in conducting their students’ behaviors, so that the students can be provided with sufficient materials in terms of enhancing their performance. Nevertheless, if these duties become affiliated with one’s occupational survival, the results may bring several severe side effects including the deterioration of student-teacher relationships. That is, as most teachers might compete among one another in order to have the most privileged students in their classrooms, they are likely to be reluctant in including students who are difficult to teach, such as those in disability over extreme poverty. Thus, it is not a recommendable policy when considering the ethics of teachers to be impartial to every student.
Furthermore, teachers might fail in some part enhancing their students’ performances, especially in circumstances when the students are in the age of being rebellious and recalcitrant against the authorities. There are obviously specific ranges of ages in which teaching becomes a challenging task. In that case, the foremost goal for the teacher might not be focused on the students’ grade but rather in coming along well with them and forming a benign environment to the students who are now in an anxious position. For instance, a well-made film “the educator” depicts how teachers are being mentally tortured by her students who are teasing and making fun of the relatively less charismatic personality of the teacher. The main character of the film shows how stressful it may become when he or she is not patriarchal or charismatic enough to tame students. In other words, it can be said that the difficulty of teaching and educating may differ according to the specific grades and groups of students in the classroom. Thus, being paid in terms of students’ performance can be advantageous to some teachers while for others it may not be.
Thus, it turns out that the salaries should not be evaluated or moderated through an inspection of the student’s behaviors but instead be fairly distributed regardless of factors that may be impossible to control in hand. The essay tried to emphasize the point by providing several circumstances that might result in misleading effects.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Even though the basic principle as being...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, thus, well, while, for instance, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.5258426966 179% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 58.6224719101 131% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2794.0 2235.4752809 125% => OK
No of words: 522.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35249042146 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77988695657 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11999044308 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511494252874 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 854.1 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.2089876683 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.052631579 118.986275619 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4736842105 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.78947368421 5.21951772744 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => 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: 0.440805647608 0.243740707755 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.145006310536 0.0831039109588 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0931151769747 0.0758088955206 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2600769163 0.150359130593 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0486789089636 0.0667264976115 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 100.480337079 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.