Professors benefit from appearing on TV.
The article states that television appearances are beneficial for the professor who appear on television and provides three reasons o support. However the professor explains that it is not beneficial for the professor as it is thought and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading claims that professors gain more audience on television than they have on campus. The speaker says that the professors who are on television shows lose their seriousness. He states that other scholars think that the professors are entertainer and so they do not invite importance meetings and conference. Actually, they lose their reputation.
Second, the article posits that television appearances also benefit for their universities. However, the speaker says that they spend a lot of their times for Television show. According to the speaker, they do not have enough time for research. And they have resposiblity against university and the spend time cause they do not give enough time to the university’s students.
Third, the reading says that at the same time public benefit the television shows which the professors talk. The speaker opposes this point by exploring that television channel do not need to serious speech. We also learn that the professors do not find on the television shows what they want to discuss in depth because the television show need to present fun or entertainment to people who watch the shows.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 144, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...n and provides three reasons o support. However the professor explains that it is not b...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 296, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ave resposiblity against university and the spend time cause they do not give enough time...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, however, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 17.0 30.3222958057 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1215.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 230.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28260869565 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89736533732 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508695652174 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 363.6 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.1450042911 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.4615384615 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6923076923 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.76923076923 7.06452816374 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160474084409 0.272083759551 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0697360810475 0.0996497079465 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0680685312715 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11493224669 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061935796307 0.0443174109184 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 63.6247240618 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.