Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance
The issue of whether teacher’s salaries should be based on their student’s academic performance has engendered controversy and can be divided into two schools of thought. On the one hand staunch defenders support that concept, as it is merely related to the laws of the free market. On the other hand, opponents contend that such a concept creates more negatives than positives and should be rejected. Were I in such an ambiguous position whether to agree or disagree, I would support the latter argument sound, even though, the former one has some positive attributes.
First and foremost, there are many different contributing factors to the whole educational process that affect the students’ performance. Indeed, into this convoluted system of learning, teachers may seem those who lead the efforts, but they are not the only ones or those with the main role. For example, the family background of each child, his or her environment of living, the mental health and even the level of education and income of the parents. All of the aforementioned constitute different elements that would have a detrimental impact on the academic performance of the students.
Therefore, the ability of any teacher and his or her zeal to educate children could easily be undermined.
Additionally, even if we accept that teacher’s salaries have more to do with the academic performance of their students, subsequently we accept that a division exists between high-paid and low-paid teachers. Admittedly, there will be schools and classrooms only for academically weak children, whose teachers are found in the lower scales of the educational payroll, and similarly other schools only with well-paid teachers. In particular, this phenomenon will create socio-economic problems inside the learning division, as we undoubtedly accept schools of two visions. Hence, that concept will intensify any professional discriminations and totally underestimate the prolific role of the teachers.
According to the other school of thought, the laws of free economy suggest that the more productive someone performs, the higher his or her earnings should be. Certainly, this idea should also be attested to the learning community, as it usually promotes integrity and hard-working mores. Nonetheless, at a first point it might seem fair and impartial, it foments many dangers. For instance, in public schools there is a range of academic performances of students inside the same classroom and every attempt to do better and go one step further could easily collapse. Weak students with limited intellectual strength, have the ability to decimate the overall performance of the classroom even when they are in small numbers, overshadowing any efforts and positive results.
In conclusion, teachers’ salaries should primarily be modified according to other factors such as years in service, experience and academic background. This would constitute a fair comparison between professionals of the learning community, bolstering the same time their role and reputation. However, in some cases teachers that achieve great results, in reference to the academic performance of their students, would be productive to be awarded. Such an action should have a rewarding and temporary role instead of an ingrained right.
Comments
4th issue
4th issue
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 31, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...tes. First and foremost, there are many different contributing factors to the whole educa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 460, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: All the
...of education and income of the parents. All of the aforementioned constitute different ele...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, nonetheless, similarly, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in particular, such as, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2823.0 2235.4752809 126% => OK
No of words: 510.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53529411765 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75217629947 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08863116044 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517647058824 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 873.9 704.065955056 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.446881456 60.3974514979 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 128.318181818 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1818181818 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.45454545455 5.21951772744 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288882752546 0.243740707755 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080616322005 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0919597001365 0.0758088955206 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150666189492 0.150359130593 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0679496738746 0.0667264976115 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.1639044944 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 100.480337079 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.