Teachers’ salaries should be based on their students’ academic performance
They say, “The teachers’ reward is in heaven” because man cannot measure the impact of teachers in the society. A teacher plays a vital role in the up-bringing of children from the kindergarten to high school even to graduate school. Aside being the medium of transfer of knowledge on different subjects, they also are friends, role models, counsellors, etc to students. Therefore, the idea to base their ‘reward’ on students’ performance is preposterous and should be vitiated.
Academic performance is relatively based on the student’s ability. In the school system, there are levels of education ranging from crèche to graduate school. The performance of a toddler may be graded based on his or her ability to colour to sky blue while it differs for a high school student. Meanwhile, in each of these classes, there are average students, the special-needs students, and the physically challenged students. To measure a teacher’s salary here maybe difficult or even impossible as there are a myriad of factors to consider. If this claim is effective, a new teacher may be discouraged as he/she would obviously receive a low salary for the first few months until both the students and teacher are well adjusted.
Beyond the difficulty to determine the salaries of teachers is the possibility to use dubious means to improve student performance in order to qualify for a ‘fat’ salary. Encouraging students to cheat in assignment and during exams or changing the activities in the curriculum to a less challenging one since salaries are directly proportional to academic performance. Teaching would no longer be an honourable job rather a means to make fast money resulting in a poor quality of education.
In contrast, more teachers would be encouraged to research and receive trainings on the most effective means of teaching if their income is based on the student’s improvement. Furthermore, it could be a fair means of payment where every teacher is paid according to their labour.
Education, generally, is worthless and cannot be valued. However, these salaries are a way to appreciate the effort of teachers for their input on students. Hence, it should not be based on performance but on merit.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 514, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'myriads'?
Suggestion: myriads
...icult or even impossible as there are a myriad of factors to consider. If this claim i...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 11.3162921348 9% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1872.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 360.0 442.535393258 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04745896984 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547222222222 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 580.5 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.3859467062 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.0 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.27777777778 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => 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: 0.540932869867 0.243740707755 222% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162903373361 0.0831039109588 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127196413832 0.0758088955206 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.298641319852 0.150359130593 199% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518775405295 0.0667264976115 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => 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.