Educationists have long used rewards as an important motivational technique to keep students enthusiastic with studying. While some people think that students with improvements deserve a reward, I firmly believe top students are more rewardable.
Advocates of the idea of rewarding according to improvements can base their argument upon the foundation of utilitarian beliefs. Compared to the small quantity of high-achievers at school, the number of average students is massive, and the improvements of the majority must be ensured. Given this rewarding scheme, average students, who are often demotivated by the idea that top positions are always beyond their reach, are properly targeted. With a little reward at each step, these students’ inclination for study is maintained, and their scores may increase accordingly.
However, I side with those who believe only excellent students should be rewarded. While improvement in academic results can be gained by determination in the short term, the pursuit of academic excellence requires sustainable efforts throughout the whole course of studying. It is therefore rational and fair to reward the best students, the ones who have devoted the most to study. In addition, this rewarding method reflects the exact reality when a student enters the labor market, where the finest job offers are only available to those who excel in what they do. All the students, including the average ones, acknowledging this, are motivated to endeavor to achieve higher academically.
In a word, the discussion of rewarding policies based on either improvements or outstanding study records shows clear and convincing evidence that it is more appropriate to reward first-class students.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, first, however, may, so, therefore, thus, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1472.0 1615.20841683 91% => OK
No of words: 263.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5969581749 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08143413126 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.631178707224 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.6445241785 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.666666667 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9166666667 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08333333333 7.06120827912 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.287552205402 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104535646431 0.084324248473 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0879824667258 0.0667982634062 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167942650049 0.151304729494 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.060774255582 0.056905535591 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 50.2224549098 66% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.2 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.9 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.