professors appearing on tv programs
The author of reading passage beieves that professors appearing on TV has a lot of advantages for himself, university and even for the publics. However, the lecture casts doubt on the claims made by the passage and states that indeed, no one might be benefited.
First of all, the author claims that it helps to elevate the reputation of professors among wide audiences. He believes that by this way, more and more people would know his or her works rather than publishing in a Journal which is read by some related scholars only. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She believes that their reputation might actually go down as they seem more like entertainers and not serious in their acedemic works. Furthermore, she points out that they might not be invited into conferences and meetings and also get cut off from thier funding for research.
Secondly, the author states that university can also benefit when professors appear on TV. He argues that when people see erudite faculty member of any university, they start perceiving university as reputed one, which in turn can lead to more donations. The lecturer rebuts this argument. She elaborates on this be mentioning that by doing so professors will lose their time for research, meetings and conferences as they will be devoting more time for practicing, rehearsing and travelling for TV programs. She also adds that neither university nor students receive benefits by this way.
Finally, the author maintains that public might as well be benefited mutually. He is of the opinion that since public have tangential contacts with university professors, TV might act as an apt platform for them to learn new ideas and know things directly from experts. The lecturer, on the other hand, states that public TV audiences do not want in depth knowledge from an adept person in so much details. Moreover, simple academic titles can also be presented by news and TV reporters with little homework.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 394, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...th knowledge from an adept person in so much details. Moreover, simple academic titl...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 326.0 270.72406181 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01533742331 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63113128137 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 145.348785872 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579754601227 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5852585025 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.1875 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.375 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.162430238176 0.272083759551 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0575271150813 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0902012638237 0.0662205650399 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108834156252 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0557349746042 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.