Professors are normally found in university classrooms
Both the reading and the lecture are about professors’ appearance on the TV with academical themes. In his commentary, the author argues that professors benefit from performance on the TV. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. She claims that neither professors, nor public gain from the TV interviews with academic colleagues.
The first contradicting point is the reputation, which professors obtain from their performance on the TV. The author of the reading states that speakers on the TV may acquire additional reputation not only for themselves, but also for the university itself from much wider audience. This point is challenged by the lecturer who says that the professor who appears on the TV may obtain reputation as non-serious. Thus, the professors may harm their reputation and loose an opportunity to attend important meetings with academic colleagues.
Another controversial issue is the question whether schools receive indirect extra credit from the popularity of their professors. The author asserts that schools obtain popularity among public while their professors appear on the TV shows, leading to an increased level of donations and applications from teenagers. The lecturer rebuts this argument, suggesting that the preparation for the TV show may lead to a leakage of professor’s time from schools’ general activities. Thus, instead of making any research, the professors are busy delivering content and preparing themselves for the show.
The third aspect of the debate is the attendance rate among interested parties, who are unable to speak with professors on their own. The author of the reading puts forth the idea that public is unable to meet professors in person and that TV shows could act as an alternative for those interested in academic themes. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that the knowledge is not fragmented and that the general reporters on the TV have all the relevant data for public.
To sum up, the author of the reading and the lecturer have fundamentally different point of views. While the former believes that TV shows are useful, the latter contends that its’ significance is greatly exaggerated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-13 | himal | view | |
| 2022-12-08 | predatoros | 86 | view |
| 2022-11-18 | rpinisetti8 | 83 | view |
| 2022-11-16 | KnockingOn | 80 | view |
| 2022-11-03 | daddy | 80 | view |
- It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects than to specialize in one specific subject 90
- In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today 76
- Altruism is a type of behaviour in which 80
- In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today 73
- Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth century Dutch painters However there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style and inde 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 32, Rule ID: WHETHER[5]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "the question"?
Suggestion: whether
...agues. Another controversial issue is the question whether schools receive indirect extra credit f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 319, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...or those interested in academic themes. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits tha...
^^^
Line 5, column 176, Rule ID: YOURS_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: An apostrophe is never used to form possessive case pronouns. Did you mean: 'its'?
Suggestion: its
...ws are useful, the latter contends that its’ significance is greatly exaggerated.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, third, thus, while, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1846.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 349.0 270.72406181 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2893982808 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91140321284 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.504297994269 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 551.7 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2584316396 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.588235294 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5294117647 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.64705882353 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107390518792 0.272083759551 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0410472278921 0.0996497079465 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0313550774271 0.0662205650399 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0610546198998 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0342694993667 0.0443174109184 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.