Professor Flitwick, according to the report, didn't use adequate discipline and was deemed too warm and welcoming. The latter I do not see to be a problem. Charms is usually a student's real introduction to magic, and particularly for muggleborn children.

Because of the nature of these beginning charms, and even some later ones, mishaps can be quite common. A relaxed environment should be sought after, so long as no action is deliberately malicious. If he otherwise knows the material and the students are learning it, I see no problem with his employment.

Professor Trelawney is being criticized in the report for not being able to make accurate predictions on command. This is something that is wrongfully expected of most seers, as visions do not necessarily come on command. If all of her answers to often-sought questions are grisley, then it may be that she needs further training in the area herself.

Everything considered, I do not believe there is enough information here, without having personally met this professor, to say anything about her teaching.

Professor Hagrid by this report was malicious and careless. If one were to go on the report alone, it would be automatically assumed that he should be not only fired, but taken off the premises. Other reports and historical accounts do not say the same. The man was perhaps naive, and very well should have been a groundskeeper without teaching the students, but he was knowledgable and very likely did his best to take precautions. The man was soft-hearted, and I very much doubt that he would have purposefully endangered the students.

Professor Sprout

was knowledgable, even by Umbridge's standards. The woman only disliked her teaching methods. I have personally found group activity to be the best way that children tend to learn. Just as well, it encourages teamwork and unity. So long as the students learn the material in an encouraging environment, I see no problem with consistant use of group work. It also allows for the professor to give better attention to the students, being able to personally attend to each of the few groups, rather than attempting to give individual attention to each student. It creates a rushed atmosphere, leaving some students behind while students who require less attention excel.

Professor Snape was well praised by Umbridge, and for good reason. He was quite a potions master, and known for both his actions and service. He also showed himself to be a model Slytherin, which wasn't exactly looked up to in that day, all things considered. He is recorded as having been heavily biased against particular students.

I believe Umbridge's report, however, is equally biased. He, perhaps, could have been a better teacher by being a mentor rather than a walking book. It is hard to say given he was under particular circumstances which we often do not have to face.

I do believe that the correct decision was one made by the end of that year... that all the professors should retain their places at Hogwarts. This is especially considering the circumstances and what we understand of that era. Had these professors been teaching in recent days, I believe they would have shown the same care and concern in protecting the students.

As a critical voice on teaching, however, and taking out Hogwart's pechant for being a center for the attraction of malicious intent, the least qualified professor would have been Professor Hagrid. He well deserved a place on school grounds for the work he did and was capable of doing, though he should have had more structure. If one were forced to make the decision, than for the sake of the lowest denominator, I would choose this professor.

The most qualified that belonged in their position was likely Professor Sprout. She showed an eagerness to teach and mentor, she kept herself open for mishap in the classroom in particular circumstances, and took care of both her students and the greenhouses. She also encouraged teamwork and acknowledged that we must all learn to work together, handing down those beliefs to her students.