Schools always collect information about teaching performance and give rewards to those teachers who perform well. Which way do you think is more useful? Why?
• To evaluate teachers' performance by students
• To evaluate teachers' performance by teachers
In today's modern and sophisticated world, teachers' performance plays a vital role in educational systems. In this connection, there are several avenues, which help schools to analyze teaching efficiency. Although contested by many that the matter of rewarding well-performed teachers based on pupils' reports is highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded as both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. Personally, I believe that schools can analyze teachers' performance by evaluating their colleagues' votes, and I will explain my reasons throughout this essay.
First, teachers are familiar with professional teachings' methods, so schools should rely on their notion to opt for the best teacher. To be more specific, tutors have a considerable amount of information about all lessons and efficient solutions. Thus, they can vote to whom exploiting the great tactics to teach; however, students are not adept in all courses, and they do not know the effectiveness of education systems. For example, my mother is a teacher, and the principle of her school chooses her to evaluate her co-workers. Because my mother has learned about various methods to solve math problems, she realizes that whether other teachers use them correctly or not. As a result, she holds a meeting with each teacher and asks them about their explanations on each math topic. When she comprehends that a teacher uses accurate instructions, she expresses her positive notion to the principle to admire a teacher.
Second, students are not mature enough to rely on their opinions to evaluate teachers. To elucidate, learners cannot decide on teaching performance wisely because they want to vote according to their own interests. For example, when I was a high school student, I had the strict teacher who handed in hard assignments, but she taught significantly, so much so that I have remembered her teachings methods after ten years. However, she did not get excellent reports from students because my classmates did not like her based on her severe behavior. Moreover, we had a poor skilled teacher who was so friendly as well as kind, and she did not force pupils to either take part in a class or perform tasks; hence, we did not learn effectively during her class. Nevertheless, she always got high points in the students' completely unfair reports.
To conclude, while there are several arguments on each side, I profoundly believe that schools should evaluate teachers based on other instructors' points of view. First of all, teachers can distinguish high-performance teachings methods based on their education knowledge; furthermore, students fill reports unreasonable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 323, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...re, students fill reports unreasonable.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, thus, well, while, for example, as a result, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 43.0788530466 109% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2263.0 1977.66487455 114% => OK
No of words: 423.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34988179669 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00365192684 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 212.727598566 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553191489362 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 680.4 618.680645161 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4225602789 48.9658058833 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.105263158 100.406767564 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2631578947 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.89473684211 5.45110844103 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.390185013684 0.236089414692 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119255459539 0.076458572812 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0590535748371 0.0737576698707 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253799861399 0.150856017488 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0505798876946 0.0645574589148 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 10.9000537634 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 86.8835125448 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.