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 teachers or supervisors.
There might be possible conflict of opinions regarding an efficient learning process. While some might prefer a peer aided learning, others would opt for an instructor facilitated learning process. However, according to me, learning things through productive and enriching discussion with fellow colleagues or friends is definitely more rewarding. I shall bolster my claim through a few explanations and examples.
First, learning as a process, must be a path of symbiotic learning, not influenced by a perception of superiority. When we opt to learn from instructors, we presume their status of high intellect - a notion that prevents us from questioning at several instances. On the other hand, a discussion with fellow peers eliminates the fear of judgement, leading to a free flowing learning process. During my school days, I remember struggling a lot to grasp elementary mathematical concepts. The teachers, although highly proficient, failed to help me out in my endeavour. I was fortunate enough to get assistance from a fellow batchmate, who made learning so easy for me. Mathematics became suddenly so easy when we could joke about problems and approached it as a mere game.
Second, learning should enhance discussion of deeper issues, and not merely those restricted to a particular curriculum. Most often in formal settings, when we learn from teachers, due to time crunch and professionalism, we fail to dive into a topic. However, when we learn from fellow individuals, we are free to reflect on ideas, no matter how naive it may seem, that might not be entertained by a teacher. During my undergraduation, I would always develop a deeper understanding of macroeconomics while discussing contemporary global macroeconomic policies with my study group. Such discussion session would stimulate a superior though process keen to know more.
Thus, I would definitely prefer to rely on the process of learning-by-doing than getting schooled by a supervisor.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-20 | Alana Gerber | 88 | view |
| 2022-12-29 | villian7 | 68 | view |
| 2022-11-18 | rpinisetti8 | 70 | view |
| 2022-11-11 | Tanvayee15 | 73 | view |
| 2022-08-10 | Louissun | 70 | view |
- As we acquire more knowledge things do not become more comprehensible but more complex and mysterious Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take I 75
- Our current way of life will have a negative impact on future generations 76
- Soon technology will provide smart cars that virtually drives themselves A computer in the car determines the speed and route to the desired destination The computer is in continuous contact with a global positioning system and other technologies that wil 78
- Fifteen years ago Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors Since that time Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes and overall student 83
- A person should never make an important decision alone 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 190, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to process'
Suggestion: to process
... for an instructor facilitated learning process. However, according to me, learning thi...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 290, Rule ID: FELLOW_CLASSMATE[1]
Message: Use simply 'colleagues'.
Suggestion: colleagues
...roductive and enriching discussion with fellow colleagues or friends is definitely more rewarding...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, may, regarding, second, so, thus, while, as for, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 15.1003584229 40% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1667.0 1977.66487455 84% => OK
No of words: 309.0 407.700716846 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.39482200647 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.48103885553 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26340188813 2.67179642975 122% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 212.727598566 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.637540453074 0.524837075471 121% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 618.680645161 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.6254901289 48.9658058833 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.0588235294 100.406767564 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1764705882 20.6045352989 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.82352941176 5.45110844103 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.170250297676 0.236089414692 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0495081071634 0.076458572812 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0454594944375 0.0737576698707 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0978405556667 0.150856017488 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0291469520327 0.0645574589148 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 10.9000537634 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 86.8835125448 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.