I believe that that we learn from a person whose views are parallel to us that whose views are contradict to us. As far as I am concerned, I can completely agree with the statement that a student must like a teacher in order to learn from the teacher. As gaining of knowledge depends on personality of both delivery person as well as beneficiary person. I have explained my opinion in the following lines.
Firstly, I believe that a student learn from a teacher when his/her views and opinions do not contradict to each other. Moreover, if a student do like a teacher, he/she will share the knowledge he gains to other students or people in a society. Such kind of relation is deemed as better to learn quickly and precisely. Also, this strategy leads to stress free and more effective learning and flow of knowledge from the teacher to a student.
Secondly, as I believe that birds of same kind flocks together, sharing of knowledge and learning is effective when a student would like a teacher. In addition, such environment leads to friendly environment between a teacher and a student for doubt solving. For instance, if a teacher is of rude manner and unwilling towards solving doubts of the students he teacher, there is more probability that students repress their feeling to ask whatever doubt he possess. As doubts remains unsolved, ultimately, the chances of confusion increases and it leads to weakening of concepts.
To take slightly tangential view, a student learns more effectively when there is both active and passive transfer of the knowledge. For instance, if the views of a student do not matches with the teacher, there is a possibility that a student is in confusion and dissent. When he will raise his doubt or dissatisfaction, a teacher will try to find solution on it. When a teacher will find solution, not only that student but also whole class gain holistic learning.
In conclusion, as we can see from the above discussion and examples, we learn better when our views match with the person. Moreover, as I believe that “birds of same kind are flock together”, there is more probability that a student will learn effectively and precisely when a student like a teacher. In few cases, leaning is deemed as the best when there is both active and passive consideration of thoughts, but such cases are rare. Therefore, we can conclude that for learning to be the best, a student should like a teacher.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 11, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: that
I believe that that we learn from a person whose views are ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 96, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'contradicted'.
Suggestion: contradicted
...are parallel to us that whose views are contradict to us. As far as I am concerned, I can ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 324, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
... on personality of both delivery person as well as beneficiary person. I have explained my...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 457, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'possesses'.
Suggestion: possesses
... their feeling to ask whatever doubt he possess. As doubts remains unsolved, ultimately...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 181, Rule ID: DONT_NEEDS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'match'?
Suggestion: match
...tance, if the views of a student do not matches with the teacher, there is a possibilit...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 79, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
...above discussion and examples, we learn better when our views match with the person. M...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.0286738351 199% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 52.1666666667 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2029.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 419.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84248210024 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8233395937 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 212.727598566 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434367541766 0.524837075471 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 624.6 618.680645161 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 3.51792114695 313% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.8605965689 48.9658058833 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.45 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.95 20.6045352989 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05 5.45110844103 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.432105961904 0.236089414692 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147358077102 0.076458572812 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.133628045262 0.0737576698707 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.268722378742 0.150856017488 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0478987035044 0.0645574589148 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 11.7677419355 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 58.1214874552 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 10.9000537634 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 86.8835125448 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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.