The 3 necessary qualities for a 'good' teacher.

You are not making bad arguments, but I am simply tryinmg to debate them as is my purpose in this round. Now on to the round (p. s. this is off the flow) ----- Now let's just tak a minute and look to my opponent's first two paragraphs. In their second paragraph we understand the consenual idea that teachers come in all shapes and sizes. we do not have to look at them simply in the term of say a high school english teacher, or algerbra teacher. now cross-applying this thought with their first paragraph, in this sense I am their teacher for this site. And I assure you none of the three principles noted in my opponent's prior speech apply to me. For example if I "knew my limitations" I would not be able to grow as a debater, if I knew my "studen't limitation" then my opponent would not get better as a debater, and if I "Knew my station" then I would be unable to win this debate. However through this very debate we see my opponent's stance is untrue. now going onto my own refutations, first my opponent asks the rhetorical question, "how can a person grow without evaluation"? look at the illustration of an artist. If an artist relied on their teacher to know their limitations they know nothing for themselves, instead it is not the teacher's job to know the artist's limitation, but the student's responsibility to know where they stand so that they can grow as an artist. So please, do not mis-interpret my thoughs, I do not thing evaluation is a bad thing, I think that a teacher evaluation the student is a bad thing and on the example of the Drama teacher, they might not be able to pop the answer off the top of their head, but they can research the answer; ask their collegues, and give the student an appropiate answer. Thus by not knowing either their own limitations nor their students' they both grow. And all the while when the drama teacher Acts as though she completely understands what they are doing the student's will have confidence in their teacher and they will learn. Going on to the second point, this does not disprove my point. If the teacher in freedom writers knew "her student's limitations" she would have never pushed them to the point she did, and they would have never moved past their current position. And maybe if Shakespear's teacher had pushed him past the point he did, the great literatures we have from him would have been even better! In fact who's to say his teacher didn't push him like that? And I personally love my opponet's martial arts example. Look to any great Kung Fu movie, before the main character becomes a great fighter he usually has his butt whooped by some-one way beyond his level. Finally going on to my opponent's conclusion. They claim that there are "Universal" qualities that must be adhered to. well for this I have two arguements, first there is no warrant for why we must accept these as the universal points. my opponent never explains or expands on these points, they only further their claims and offers expansion on them. more so secondly, this is still putting teachers in abox and sayign there are certain qualities. Now also my opponent dropped many points in my last speech, this only proves my tance that we cannot define a good teacher in only three qualities. For these reasons I urge a Con vote I now hand the debate back over to my very capable, and humble opponent. :3