Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People learn things better from those at their own level-such as fellow students or co-workers- than from those at a higher level, such as teacher or supervisors.
The training process is complicated progress and requires precise concern to achieve success. While some people may hold a view that an individual learns effectively from a person in his level; others, on the other hand, may believe that comprehensive learning occurs from those with higher scientific status. I personally do concur with the second perspective. Among the countless reasons which give adherence to my outlook, I will delve into the most conspicuous ones in what follows.
The first striking reason which should be considered is the chasm knowledge and experience of the teachers or supervisors. Indeed, these people possess comprehensive knowledge and experience in the field of science and training; consequently, they can distinguish and recognize the main root of the issue and solve it in an accurate method. This fact is also verified by a noteworthy intelligence study recently conducted in my country. According to this reliable study, an expert in the field of training or tutoring can identify the reason of mistake done by his students two times as quick as the ordinary person. In this condition, as a tutor makes the right identification of the problem, his attempt for solving it will be more effective too. Therefore, students learn efficiently and quickly.
Another equally crucial reason which should be highlighted here is the possibility of wrong or fallacious guide that a person can get from a person from his own level. In fact, fellow students or co-worker has an identical level of understanding from the topic as a person have; thus, there is a feasibility of repetition of the same mistake that person can do it. In this scenario, that person merely learns the wrong method and do err. A lucid example which can shed the spotlight on the issue is my experience during high school. Our physic lecturer talked about the light and prism law and ask us to review the content of the textbook. After reading the book, I faced a term which was similar to the word of the prism, I asked its definition from my fellow friend. Since, she also had the same fault cognition from the word, gave the wrong explanation. However, when the teacher explained the term, both us knew that we were false. This instance explicitly depicts that learning from the same level person can cause to err.
However, some people may believe that the same range people are more effective to each other; and they learn effectively when they exchange the knowledge by someone in their level. Although this belief is sound and impact level of two similar people is higher than two different persons, these people do underestimate a vital and subtle point. Indeed, any impact should not be considered as the learning, since as discussed previously, if this learning occurs in the mistaken method, it should not be categorized as the learning. Actually, it is a wrong influence rather and learning.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned reasons and fact explicitly illustrate that people learn better from a teacher or supervisor. Since teachers can easily and wisely recognize the issues and address them properly; the people with identical understanding can lead you incorrectly; furthermore, not any impact should be titled as the learning.
- tpo 21.1 80
- TPO3-integrated writing 3
- tpo10 76
- tpo23 86
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the planning department of an electric power company."Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, manufacturers are now marketing many home appli 72
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ost conspicuous ones in what follows. The first striking reason which should b...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...udents learn efficiently and quickly. Another equally crucial reason which sho...
^^^
Line 5, column 1024, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'erring'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: erring
...ng from the same level person can cause to err. However, some people may believe t...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e same level person can cause to err. However, some people may believe that th...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... wrong influence rather and learning. To wrap it up, all the aforementioned re...
^^^
Line 9, column 99, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
...explicitly illustrate that people learn better from a teacher or supervisor. Since tea...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, second, so, therefore, thus, while, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 13.8261648746 159% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 43.0788530466 114% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2725.0 1977.66487455 138% => OK
No of words: 538.0 407.700716846 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06505576208 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81610080973 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78953928365 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 274.0 212.727598566 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509293680297 0.524837075471 97% => OK
syllable_count: 839.7 618.680645161 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 9.59856630824 156% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.51792114695 227% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3770942302 48.9658058833 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.0 100.406767564 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.52 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44 5.45110844103 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.23390208504 0.236089414692 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0607633879075 0.076458572812 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607767829224 0.0737576698707 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13004763559 0.150856017488 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458152100594 0.0645574589148 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 86.8835125448 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.