It is said that "Not everything that is learned is contained in books". Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. v.1

Learning is like a journey that one travels from a particular point to reach some destination. One can learn from a variety of sources which include books, magazines, newspapers, experiments, people, own reflection, etc. In my opinion, learning is deep if learner learns by experimenting however, few people believes that books are better source of knowledge. First of all, I think experiments and hamds on experiences help learners learn knowledge which is not in books. Learners can use trial and error methods to explore new inventions in different fields. For example, in sciemce, children can experiment and find results by observing and analysing in depth. In addition to this, I found during research that learners remember only 10% of what they see, 20% of what they listen but they remember 70 % of what they do it themselves. Furthermore, I have observed that learners can learn better if they can relate learning in class with real life and this is more possible when they will experience things themselves. On the contrary, books are necessary to back up new findings with literature and references. Authenticity is required when learners acquire new learned knowledge which can be gained only through books. Moreover, research says that learners are categorized as three different learning styles such as auditory, visual and kinesthetic. Auditory and visual learners may like to learn by reading a book full of illustrations. To conclude, in my opinion, variety of sources which include both experiences and books are required to acquire authentic knowledge. With out experience, bookish knowledge is not useful.