judging teacher as aTV
The reading states that nowadays the presence and intentional ongoing to the television by the professor has legions effect as a whole for the betterment of society, which is why he provides three logic as support. However the professor explains that it has an enormous pitfalls rather than conveniences and so he refutes three of the logic of the reading with tenable ways.
First, the reading claims that professor deems that if he goes to television as a prime guest in an educational or contemporary program, surely it will create a huge fuel for his appearance. He deems that due to a reputed teacher, all will follow him. Besides, in the journal paper only few students keep notion about him and his research. But in this case, all audience will accept him with proper respect. Turning to the other side of the logic, the professor says by refuting this, certainly its effect is very pernicious. When he intends to deliver speech in the television, his mentality will rush in that manner. Only his concern to research area will decimate. Most of the cases, TV authority convene inexperienced teacher. Not only that but also in order to be a TV celebrity, he will use all of his sap and contrivance.
Second the article posits that when a knowledgeable person sits as a speech holder in the television, no doubt all people enthrall to watch the program. As a result the university will use this reputation to grab new students into their campus by publicizing their aspects to the mass people. Moreover, the students will quench their thirst of knowledge by focusing ins and outs of that view. Conversely, the lecture opines in the reverse direction here. It says that for grabbing the publicity, the professor will be earnest to go TV center by traveling which consumes time, he will prepare of draft which is another reason to be wastage. Moreover, such endeavors will go in vain as students are not so serious about it.
Third, the reading claims that since people get low advantages by exposing to the professor, so it obviously enhances their knowledge and can learn their momentous views. In this case the lecture overturns these notions and refers that this opportunity is a mirage. Actually after dinner every people want to relish entertainment, not deliberation about a topic. So it will not enthrall them. Besides, generally professor comes in TV in a literary program which knowledge is available to mass people from news and reports. Why they use their time to hear again
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 216, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...why he provides three logic as support. However the professor explains that it has an e...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'pitfall'?
Suggestion: pitfall
...fessor explains that it has an enormous pitfalls rather than conveniences and so he refu...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 154, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
...l people enthrall to watch the program. As a result the university will use this r...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, conversely, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, third, no doubt, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 15.1003584229 60% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 43.0788530466 111% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2074.0 1977.66487455 105% => OK
No of words: 425.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69013936944 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531764705882 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 639.0 618.680645161 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.5373769108 48.9658058833 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.1739130435 100.406767564 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4782608696 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86956521739 5.45110844103 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.88709677419 246% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0229288048012 0.236089414692 10% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.010217805427 0.076458572812 13% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0331905463164 0.0737576698707 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0114786119987 0.150856017488 8% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198815391821 0.0645574589148 31% => 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: 10.8 11.7677419355 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 10.9000537634 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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.
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.