- UID
- 808888
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-9-18
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
这是我写的第三篇issue，时间依然超，感觉这三篇还没总结出什么模板，OG的范文似乎也没什么固定格式，谁给一下意见，谢谢啊~附上刚写的issue，感觉是标准的3.5分。。。
30. Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
It has been concurred with that teachers serve the purpose of cultivating students, and has been regarded as most lofty profession, respected by a range of people. However, when it comes to how to pay for them, there still exist debates. Someone may propose that now that they task is to educate students, we should pay for them based on their students’ academic performance. To some extent, it is right and in fact it has been implemented by several schools. In my eyes, however, we should be cautious about it, and try to establish a sound evaluation system to judge their emolument.
Admittedly, utilizing students’ performance as a judging standard is objective and beneficial to evaluate their teaching method, and even stimulate teachers to devote much more time to teaching students. Students’ performance usually is closely linked to teachers, and we have seen many times that a good teacher could lead the whole class to get good result in academy through his glamour and fit teaching method, even if these students’ original levels may appear to be different, whereas some teachers that are negligent to the students in terms of both study and living may not create a so called “excellent class”, which is judged majorly by student’s performance. What’s more, when being aware of their students performing poor in academy and their own interest also weaken, most of teachers will reflect their educating methodology and try to modify it to drive students progress. Therefore, it seems that the students’ performance is a good gauge to determine how much money we need to pay for them.
However, I have to say that when we see its positive side, the otherwise side should not be ignored. In such policy, some teacher may excessively focus on the students’ performance, and thus may implement a oppressed teaching method. For example, they purely pursue high academic performance, resulting in haphazardly adding classes, and obligatorily requiring students to take part in extra classes. Even worse, they may eliminate some extra-curriculum like P.E and music, which are conducive for students to broaden their horizon and relax their mind. Furthermore, because every student and class does not stand in the same level, teachers that appointed to those better classes----students have better basics and study harder by chance may gain a great advantage, and this apparently is unfair. Those teachers appointed to normal class may envy the former ones, and this will affect their emotion when instructing students, and even unleashing the ire on them. Consequently, we cannot just notice the policy’s benefits.
Indeed, a better way to reconcile the contradiction is available, that is, teachers should have a base salary, which can address their normal demand. At the same time, the extra bonus should be judged by their performance, which including students’ academic performance, students’ satisfaction response, and the peer evaluation. Only expand the judging system can we avoid that teachers concentrate on their interest and hastily push student “forward”, and also help them improve their teaching qualities.
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-2-7 21:51:23
收藏
收藏
楼主
