Professors appearance on televisions
The reading states that the appearance of professors on television is of great benefit. The author provides three reasons of support. However, the lecture opposes all of the author's reasons and discusses how professors appearance on TV doesn't bring benefit to anyone.
First, the author posits that professors can acquire reputations by appearing on television. The professor doesn't agree with that. She explains that it is not good for professors to appear on television because televisions are more to entertain rather than to educate their viewers, as well as these professors might get less attention and appreciation from their fellow scholars. They might not be invited for important and serious events to discuss their ideas, and they might miss the events in which their ideas could have been chosen for being fund.
Second, the article claims that it would also benefit the universities where the professors come from. Conversely, the professor mentions that the professor appearance on TV would take so much of their time including preparing what they will present, traveling and even getting ready to appear on TV. Consequently, the professors will spend less time on more important things such as their researches, attending university businesses and the time they spend with their students. Thats how the professor emphasizes that professors appearance on TV would be more disadvantages
Third, the reading avers that it's also advantageous to the public. The listening states that it is not clear how does it benefit the public. She explains that even though professors have a lot of knowledge to share, the TV networks don't want them to go deep in the topics they discuss which shows that their purpose is nothing else but to have an educational title.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 164, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...f support. However, the lecture opposes all of the authors reasons and discusses how profe...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 237, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...scusses how professors appearance on TV doesnt bring benefit to anyone. First, th...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 108, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... appearing on television. The professor doesnt agree with that. She explains that it i...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 480, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...he time they spend with their students. Thats how the professor emphasizes that profe...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 520, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...Thats how the professor emphasizes that professors appearance on TV would be more disadvan...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 575, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...arance on TV would be more disadvantages Third, the reading avers that its also a...
^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 233, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... of knowledge to share, the TV networks dont want them to go deep in the topics they...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, first, however, second, so, third, well, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1496.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23076923077 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7174288907 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538461538462 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.546045065 49.2860985944 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.076923077 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46153846154 7.06452816374 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.420056142902 0.272083759551 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173066105049 0.0996497079465 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.154847404117 0.0662205650399 234% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258350867314 0.162205337803 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123933923001 0.0443174109184 280% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => 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.