Teachers should be paid according to how well their students perform.
First and foremost, the program urges teachers to enhance their teaching efficiency. Normally, One’s salary is the major stimulus to improve the quality of his work. When students are unable to make progress or perform unsatisfactorily in their school work, such outcomes reflect negatively upon teachers. Such a psychological competition not only justifies their teaching ability, but also helps students learn. As long as such pressures function well and are finally turned into impetus, there is every reason to believe that greater efforts will be made. Without doubt, the major purpose of school education is to produce positive influences on students and instruct them to perform well in studies. Where there is a will, there is a way. The adoption of better teaching methods and the improved personal guidance of teachers contribute to the realization of this goal.
In addition, student will receive more attention from their teachers because of this motion. The traditional “teacher-centered” mode of teaching allows a teacher to rule the classroom roost by using a prescribed approach to teach a generic curriculum to everyone at the same time. The domination of teachers in class makes it difficult for them to affect effective two-way communication. In these types of classroom, students are passive spectators, which considerable undermines their confidence and learning passion. However, if a more “student-based” learning atmosphere is created due to the implementation of the proposal, students might be more active in their studies. Teachers are attaching greater importance to the individuality of each student, so as to instruct them more effectively. Hence, the gap between teachers and students is narrowed. As soon as effective communication is ensured, teaching and learning performance will be improved.
Admittedly, several defects of this proposal ought to be noted. On the one hand, some of the teachers may be unwilling to teach a class with more low-level students, which might lead to unnecessary troubles. On the other hand, some students may endure too much pressure from their teachers, which may threaten their health and incur a loss of self-confidence.
As a result, a number of factors ought to be taken into consideration before this innovative proposal be passed and implemented. Bearing in mind the merits and the negative possibilities elaborated above, I would render my support to the notion that teachers can be paid on the basis of their students’ performance.
- The reading passage focuses on the tax policy of unhealthy products. And the reading passage claims that the policy has many benifits and should be carried out. The professor, however, states that all three points in the reading could be challenged. In he 71
- It is difficult for teachers to be both popular (well-liked) and effective to help students learning. 73
- Successful people try new things and take risks rather than only doing what they already know how to do well. 71
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Environmental issues are too complex to be handled by individual. 90
- Teachers should be paid according to how well their students perform. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 777, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...e to the individuality of each student, so as to instruct them more effectively. Hence, ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 81, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...sal ought to be noted. On the one hand, some of the teachers may be unwilling to teach a cl...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, so, well, as to, in addition, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 43.0788530466 53% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 52.1666666667 111% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2153.0 1977.66487455 109% => OK
No of words: 392.0 407.700716846 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49234693878 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44960558625 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39470852511 2.67179642975 127% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 212.727598566 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571428571429 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 669.6 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.59856630824 10% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5162826651 48.9658058833 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.523809524 100.406767564 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6666666667 20.6045352989 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.45110844103 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.33164608437 0.236089414692 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0947461914977 0.076458572812 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0512591772091 0.0737576698707 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202124626623 0.150856017488 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0363794541263 0.0645574589148 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 11.7677419355 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 58.1214874552 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 10.9000537634 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.48 8.01818996416 118% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 86.8835125448 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.