Some people believe that the most important qualities of an effective teacher are understanding and empathy. Others believe that it is more important for teachers to be rigorous and demanding in their expectations for students
The childhood experience of a harsh teacher is a ubiquitous one. Striking the balance between treating students with understanding and empathy while setting high expectations and issuing a heavy workload must undoubtedly be difficult for teachers. Setting the bar high for students has the benefits of challenging students and preparing them for future studies. However, ultimately it is better for educators to adopt a dogma of understanding and empathy when working with students.
In today’s world especially, students must face a plethora of difficult situations outside of class which will detract from their learning. For example, a young child may one day be thrust into the midst of an ugly divorce and have to learn how to cope with such a previously foreign situation while still managing to precariously balance studying and a social life. Such a task must be incredibly daunting for such a fledgling child, and for an educator to not be able to sympathize with such a child would be a grave injustice. Clearly, an austere and demanding teacher would be the last thing this student could need to further add to his emotional burden.
Additionally, in any classroom, an instructor must deal with a diverse assembly of students. They may come from any number of different cultural backgrounds, and may approach learning in disparate ways. Furthermore, they may possess vastly different intellects, or may even be weighed down by the hardship of a developmental disorder. In such circumstances, such a variety of students may not be able to handle the rigorous work load and high standards of a strict instructor. Surely, to deal with such variation between students, a more understanding and empathetic approach would help every student glean the most knowledge out of the class.
However, a teacher with high expectations does have some merits. An intense course load would help prepare students for future course where the work load will be inherently more difficult. In addition, high expectations will push students beyond their conceived limits and may allow them to reach academic or intellectual achievements they never thought were possible. However, the ultimate goal of a teacher should be not only to push their students past their limits, but to cultivate within each student a passion and drive to learn more. Then they may be able to open their books with alacrity and not feel the dread of working to appease a stern professor. Clearly, if a teacher wants to nurture a lust for learning in their students, they should adopt a more empathetic and kind approach to teaching.
In conclusion, both of these polar opposite teaching styles have their benefits, although one reigns superior. While educating through the implementation of great expectations and a heavy work load can challenge students and better prepare them for future course work, a more compassionate and understanding teacher can better accommodate the diverse needs of their students and the situations and challenges they may face. Conclusively, a kinder and more nurturing demeanor encourages students to fully embrace their studying and love what they learn.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-27 | LauraTing | 66 | view |
| 2023-11-07 | ibralieah1030 | 66 | view |
| 2023-06-23 | the.umair__ | 83 | view |
| 2023-06-23 | the.umair__ | 66 | view |
| 2023-02-20 | HSNDEK | 47 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 75
- Claim No act is done purely for the benefit of others Reason All actions even those that seem to be done for other people are based on self interest 83
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society one must study its major cities 66
- Educational institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and sup 66
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions 83
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, then, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2654.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 507.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23471400394 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74517233601 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92524148802 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497041420118 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 794.7 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3487392004 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.636363636 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0454545455 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.21951772744 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.293905949549 0.243740707755 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0933108572085 0.0831039109588 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520586645353 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18068722674 0.150359130593 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600633482137 0.0667264976115 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 100.480337079 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, then, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2654.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 507.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23471400394 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74517233601 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92524148802 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497041420118 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 794.7 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3487392004 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.636363636 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0454545455 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.21951772744 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.293905949549 0.243740707755 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0933108572085 0.0831039109588 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520586645353 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18068722674 0.150359130593 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600633482137 0.0667264976115 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 100.480337079 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => 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.