Professors’ appearance on TVs
Both the reading and the lecture are about the appearance of professors on TV. The author claims that professors' appearance on TV is useful; however, the lecturer subscribes the opposite view. He says that participating in TV programs is not good for the professors, and he provides three reasons to support his argument.
First, according to the passage, it is stated that professors gain benefit from their appearance on the TV programs; furthermore, they become well-known among the individuals. By On the other hand, the professor refuses this line of thought and asserts that taking part on TV programs is not substantial for professors. He brings an example that shows professors' participation on TV programs might prevent from their solicitation in academic and important programs.
Secondly, the author states that colleges gain benefit from professors' presence on TV programs. He adds that teachers' participation triggers positive publicity for universities; nevertheless, the lecturer denies the words of writer and claims that professors' appearance on TV programs waste their time, giving an example of travelling time to various televisions.
Finally, it is alleged in the passage that people gain profits from professors' participation on TV programs; consequently, the professor refutes this claim and states that individuals do not gain any benefit from professors' participation on the TV programs. He adds that materials which are used by professors on televisions are not as much as useful for people.
In conclusion, it is stated in the passage that professors' appearance is useful for them; however, the lecturer refuses this point and says that it not useful for professors to participate in TV programs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 103, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...rofessors on TV. The author claims that professors appearance on TV is useful; however, th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hree reasons to support his argument. First, according to the passage, it is s...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n in academic and important programs. Secondly, the author states that college...
^^^^
Line 9, column 110, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'teachers'' or 'teacher's'?
Suggestion: teachers'; teacher's
...s presence on TV programs. He adds that teachers participation triggers positive publici...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 249, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...ies the words of writer and claims that professors appearance on TV programs waste their t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...avelling time to various televisions. Finally, it is alleged in the passage th...
^^^^
Line 15, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...are not as much as useful for people. In conclusion, it is stated in the passa...
^^^^
Line 17, column 49, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...usion, it is stated in the passage that professors appearance is useful for them; however,...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, first, furthermore, however, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, well, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1483.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43223443223 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13063189191 2.5805825403 121% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.454212454212 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 435.6 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.6246972064 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.818181818 110.228320801 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8181818182 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4545454545 7.06452816374 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.213234604683 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115871050189 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0639580046209 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156278498256 0.162205337803 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0192472221725 0.0443174109184 43% => 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: 16.6 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.