study with friends or with teachers
Our learning methods dramatically impact the depth of the understanding that we acquire. Some people argue that we could learn better from our peers while others find merit in being taught by someone who is at a higher level. From my perspective, people could build a deeper understanding of any subject once they benefit from an instructor who is more knowledgeable than them. I feel this way for two main reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.
To begin with, our peers are not as proficient as real instructors, which makes them less reliable with regard to the accuracy of what they teach us. Even though some of our classmates or co-workers might be more knowledgeable than us, the level of their mastery is still far from a professional teacher who has been trained specifically to teach in a certain field. My own experience is a good example of this. When I first entered Isfahan University of Technology (IUT) about three years ago to do a master’s degree in mechanical engineering I met a roommate who played an Iranian musical instrument called Setar. At first glance, he seemed to be so skillful at playing Setar that I was encouraged to learn from him. He kindly accepted to teach me how to play, and I continued my training about two months. After this two month period I felt so confident that I decided to go to a professional Setar player to pursue my trainings. Nevertheless, to my chagrin, I just found out that I had been on the wrong track for the last two months. Consequently, I had to spend a remarkable amount of time to erase the wrong habits in playing that were somehow fossilized in my brain. This experience made me believe that one should always refer to experienced trainers for whatever he or she is planning to learn.
Moreover, a pedagogue is always required if you really wish to learn systematically and with discipline. It is always possible to procrastinate when you are not supervised. Hence it is quite possible to deviate from a regular learning basis. For instance, few weeks ago, two of my classmates decided to learn a topic in turbine design from scratch. They were so enthusiastic at first that no one doubted their unwavering stance. Nevertheless, I was sure that their thirst for learning would soon subside because of lack of extrinsic supervision. As I had prognosticated, the whole learning eagerness was only a flash in the pan, and it took them only 10 days to forfeit their plans. As illustrated, a pushing force from someone who you look up to is always required to keep you going.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that learning from professional teachers is preferable to learning from peers.
Not only will the existence of a pedagogue motivate us, but also we could be assured of quality learning.
Every individual should try to benefit real well-trained instructors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 128, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
.... Some people argue that we could learn better from our peers while others find merit ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 813, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...continued my training about two months. After this two month period I felt so confide...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 174, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...crastinate when you are not supervised. Hence it is quite possible to deviate from a ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, look, moreover, nevertheless, really, so, still, thus, well, while, for instance, i feel, in conclusion, to begin with, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.0286738351 172% => OK
Pronoun: 69.0 43.0788530466 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 52.1666666667 136% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2367.0 1977.66487455 120% => OK
No of words: 490.0 407.700716846 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8306122449 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70488508055 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94819140657 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548979591837 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 728.1 618.680645161 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.994623655914 101% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.2885530403 48.9658058833 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.68 100.406767564 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6 20.6045352989 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.08 5.45110844103 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.53405017921 132% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 11.8709677419 118% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0627403949045 0.236089414692 27% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0174561822773 0.076458572812 23% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485138090929 0.0737576698707 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0267515945744 0.150856017488 18% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.028727807536 0.0645574589148 44% => 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: 11.1 11.7677419355 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 10.9000537634 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.