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.
I presume the purpose of this claim is to give an incentive for teachers to teach better in a way that their students' academic performance improves. Increased student performance would be important for prestige of the school and also for the students' future career opportunities. However such a scheme is not feasible because its implicit assumptions are both onerous and dangerous. The issue is that academic performance cannot easily measured in a consistent fashion due to differences in teacher difficulty and teaching style. There are many unintended consequences of this lack of foresight such as teachers lowering the difficulty of their courses to show improved student academic performance, has an overemphasis on academic performance, and
One inevitable consequence of an implementation of the claim would that teachers would inevitably lower the rigor of their courses in order most easily secure their salaries and job. While it is possible to assume that teachers would adopt other strategies to improve academic performance such as adding more effort into teaching, it is naive to think that a less strenous option would happen. That is, a teacher could just decrease the rigor of his material. Even if such a teacher is more morally just, he may be held figurative hostage by his students, who could tank their academic performance to drop their teacher's salary into oblivion or simply choose an easier teacher. From these hypothetical examples, we see that such a policy is in principle flawed between the teacher is no longer independent to teach his material, but rather is anchored to and sometimes forced to the whims of his students.
Another issue seen is that teachers are coerced to have an undue focus on their students' academic performance. While academic performance is a very important for a student and his life, there are other important faucets for him to improve such as his character and his mores. The implications of this policy would result in unbalanced students with good academic performance, but limited social knowledge and real-life knowledge.
I heavily disagree with this claim for the reasons above. It is foolish to assume the best case scenario of such a policy, and so upon closer examination, it is noticeable that it is deluded. Its intended goal is even unlikely to happen or succeed, because human nature unfortunately can twist its good, but misguided intentions. In fact, it would heavily force teachers into unfavorable situations and limit the personal growth of many students. More nuanced solutions are necessary to increase academic performance without compromising teacher integrity and student character.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 281, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...e students future career opportunities. However such a scheme is not feasible because i...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 446, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a consistent fashion" with adverb for "consistent"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...emic performance cannot easily measured in a consistent fashion due to differences in teacher difficult...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 749, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...veremphasis on academic performance, and One inevitable consequence of an impleme...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'while', 'in fact', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.222707423581 0.240241500013 93% => OK
Verbs: 0.150655021834 0.157235817809 96% => OK
Adjectives: 0.126637554585 0.0880659088768 144% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0589519650655 0.0497285424764 119% => OK
Pronouns: 0.061135371179 0.0444667217837 137% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.120087336245 0.12292977631 98% => OK
Participles: 0.0305676855895 0.0406280797675 75% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.91584764246 2.79330140395 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0349344978166 0.030933414821 113% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0807860262009 0.0997080785238 81% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0262008733624 0.0249443105267 105% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00218340611354 0.0148568991511 15% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2677.0 2732.02544248 98% => OK
No of words: 425.0 452.878318584 94% => OK
Chars per words: 6.29882352941 6.0361032391 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.409411764706 0.366273622748 112% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.331764705882 0.280924506359 118% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.249411764706 0.200843997647 124% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.148235294118 0.132149295362 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91584764246 2.79330140395 104% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 219.290929204 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522352941176 0.48968727796 107% => OK
Word variations: 59.3761230208 55.4138127331 107% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6194690265 82% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.380412469 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.9739991152 59.4972553346 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.470588235 141.124799967 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 23.380412469 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.529411764706 0.674092028746 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.94800884956 81% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.21349557522 58% => OK
Readability: 58.1764705882 51.4728631049 113% => OK
Elegance: 1.37903225806 1.64882698954 84% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.312196547819 0.391690518653 80% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0923828687993 0.123202303941 75% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0672938673507 0.077325440228 87% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.489432644122 0.547984918172 89% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.119329328866 0.149214159877 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13276387743 0.161403998019 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642049067787 0.0892212321368 72% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.380264243828 0.385218514788 99% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0728874090897 0.0692045440612 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234152381624 0.275328986314 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0418381501224 0.0653680567796 64% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.4325221239 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.30420353982 113% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 9.0 7.22455752212 125% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 13.5995575221 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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.