Teachers' salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students.
A society prospers only when it has a well-educated generation to lead it in the future, and the most crucial roles are of the teachers who actually build these future leaders. Any unnecessary stress to the teachers will only be counterproductive. Stressing them financially based on performance of others, while they have little or nothing to do with it, is such an example of an unnecessary stress. Therefore, a teacher’s salary should not be a matter of stipulation based on the academic performance of his/her students.
A teacher’s performance is usually measured based on his/her class’s academic performance, however, it is not necessarily a true reflection of his/her abilities. Imagine John, who is not fond of mathematics and calculus flies over his head, performing poorly in Mr. Smith’s mathematics class and bringing down the average performance of the class. In such a scenario, it is not Mr. Smith’s inability to perform as a teacher, but rather John’s apathy towards mathematics that is causing the fall in the academic performance of the class. So punishing Mr. Smith by penalizing his salary will only be unjust. Under such scenario, it can be expected that some of the teachers may fall into the pit of mental stress because of prior financial stress, and eventually fabricate results of the class in order to “fix” their own lives. I am one hundred percent confident in asserting that the society will be much more comfortable accepting a student poor in mathematics, rather than accepting a “fabricated” expert in mathematics.
Furthermore, there are students who will be more than willing to take advantage of such a proposal in order to hide their own shortcomings. For example, a student with no academic ambition often finds himself being confronted by the teacher to perform better (of course the teacher is going to confront – after all his/her salary is at stakes!), however, he is vexed by the confrontation and decides to perform even worse just to take revenge on the teacher. As a result, the teacher’s salary decreases, and on papers, the teacher has been blamed for something he/she has nothing to do with. This decision will put the teachers into a more vulnerable state than one can fathom.
However, it is true that such a decision will have some positive impacts as well. The teachers will be more eager to find effective teaching strategies in order to improve the academic performance of the class and thus earn a higher salary for themselves. This will also raise competition among the teachers – a competition that can be very positive for the betterment of any academic institution.
Academic performance of students, one of the most important health-indicators of an academic institute, however, is not a true reflection of a teacher’s quality and ability to teach. The ramifications of structuring a teacher’s salary based on the academic performance of his/her students will not only open doors of immoral consequences, but also will deteriorate the healthy mind of the teacher. Therefore, any such proposal should not be allowed to surface into action.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 677, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... such scenario, it can be expected that some of the teachers may fall into the pit of menta...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1021, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...r in mathematics, rather than accepting a 'fabricated' expert in mathem...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, therefore, thus, well, while, after all, for example, of course, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2671.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 510.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23725490196 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75217629947 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28878010616 2.79657885939 118% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466666666667 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 851.4 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.0743707177 60.3974514979 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.55 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 5.21951772744 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.504820492016 0.243740707755 207% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167772785905 0.0831039109588 202% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.131836714856 0.0758088955206 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.317453299202 0.150359130593 211% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0814169516924 0.0667264976115 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.