Professors are normally found in university classrooms offices and libraries doing research and lecturing to their students More and more however they also appear as guests on television news programs giving expert commentary on the latest events in the w

Essay topics:

Professors are normally found in university classrooms, offices, and libraries doing research
and lecturing to their students. More and more, however, they also appear as guests on
television news programs, giving expert commentary on the latest events in the world. These
television appearances are of great benefit to the professors themselves as well as to their
universities and the general public.
Professors benefit from appearing on television because by doing so acquire reputations as
authorities in their academic fields among a much wider audience than they have on
campus. If a professor publishes views in an academic journal, only other scholars will learn
about and appreciate those views. But when a professor appears on TV, thousands of
people outside the narrow academic community become aware of the professor’s ideas. So
when professors share their ideas with a television audience, the professors’ importance as
scholars is enhanced.
Universities also benefit from such appearances. The universities receive positive publicity
when their professors appear on TV. When people see a knowledgeable faculty member of a
university on television, they think more highly of that university. That then leads to an
improved reputation for the university. And that improved reputation in turn leads to more
donations for the university and more applications from potential students.
Finally, the public gains from professors’ appearing on television. Most television viewers
normally have no contact with university professors. When professors appear on television,
viewers have a chance to learn from experts and to be exposed to views they might
otherwise never hear about. Television is generally a medium for commentary that tends to
be superficial, not deep or thoughtful. From professors on television, by contrast, viewers get
a taste of real expertise and insight.

LISTENING SCRIPT
Lately, we’ve been seeing some professors on television. Though it’s sometimes claimed to be a good thing, we should question whether anybody really benefits from it. First of all, it’s not good for the professors themselves—not from a professional standpoint. Rightly or wrongly, a professor who appears on TV tends to get the reputation among fellow professors of being someone who is not a serious scholar— someone who chooses to entertain rather than to educate. And for that reason, TV professors may not be invited to important conferences—important meetings to discuss their academic work. They may even have difficulty getting money to do research. So for professors, being a TV celebrity has important disadvantages. A second point is that being on TV can take a lot of a professor’s time—not just the time on TV but also time figuring out what to present and time spent rehearsing, travel time, even time getting made up to look good for the cameras. And all this time comes out of the time the professor can spend doing research, meeting with students, and attending to university business. So you can certainly see there are problems for the university and its students when professors are in the TV studio and not on campus. So who does benefit? The public? That’s not so clear either. Look, professors do have a lot of knowledge to offer, but TV networks don’t want really serious in-depth academic lectures for after-dinner viewing. What the networks want is the academic title, not the intellectual substance. The material that professors usually present on TV—such as background on current events, or some brief historical introduction to a new movie version of a great literary work—this material is not much different from what viewers would get from a TV reporter who had done a little homework.

MY ESSAY :

The lecture and reading are both discussing television appearences of university professors. While the reading claims that the appearence of a professor is beneficial to both the professor and the society. The lecture contradicts it by saying that we should question such claim by dismissing each point made in the reading.
First of all, the reading states that the professors benefit themselves by appearing on television, as they gain reputation to a larger scale of public. The lecture however refutes this by pointing out that such appearences are not good for the professors professional career. The lecture explains that this makes the professor appear not as a serious scholar infront of his fellow professors, which leads to the loss of being invited to academic events such as conferences and meetings.
Next, the reading passage makes the point that universities can gain and benefit from these appearences as well. As they will be able to have better reputation and that they will gain publicity. The lecture however refutes that by pointing out that the professor is wasting his time. It gives the example of the professor being on campus teaching and meeting with students, as well as making research for the university rather than wasting time for the television.
Finally, the reading argues that public can learn from these television shows and that they can things that they never knew about before. On the other hand, the lecture refutes this argument by stating that television shows do not invite professors to talk about in depth knowledge, as this is not their aim. Rather, they invite them to talk about general issues and their main aim is to attract the public by the title of the professor and not by his knowledge.

The author and lecturer discuss about appearing of college professor on Television shows. The author of the article feels that college professors by appearing as a guest on television shows is a benefit to university, public and professors themselves. The lecturer disputes this point of view by stating that it is actually not a good thing for a professor to appear on television shows.

According to the reading professor acquire reputation among wider audience and their scholar importance is greatly enhanced as when they appear as guest on television shows. Reading also tell us that their idea will be known to many if they appear on television shows. The lecturer refutes this argument by stating that appearing on television is not good for the reputation of the professor as fellow professor thinks that professor as mere entertainer not a serious researcher.

Additionally, reading claims that university also gain from professor appearance on television shows as university name will be known to wider audience which further results in additional donation and more potential student applications to university. This argument is rejected by lecturer, stating that it will not be beneficial for the university as a lot time of a professor is wasted in traveling, rehearsing and that time can be spend in research and interacting with student which is actually beneficial for university.

Finally, reading states that public also gains from professor's television appearance as lot of people can learn from the ideas and insights of the professor but lecturer debunk this claim by stating that television shows are not inclined towards showing depth of a topic, they are only interested in academic topic. Thus, public will not gain anything from it.

Votes
Average: 8.7 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 104, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...essor on Television shows. The author of the article feels that college professor...
^^
Line 1, column 254, 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.
...sity, public and professors themselves. The lecturer disputes this point of view by...
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, if, so, thus, in addition

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1486.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 281.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28825622776 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87835024633 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.444839857651 0.540411800872 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 466.2 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => 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: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 83.1230413303 49.2860985944 169% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.6 110.228320801 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.253292289549 0.272083759551 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119910483384 0.0996497079465 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0493533053305 0.0662205650399 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164974076783 0.162205337803 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.039784494297 0.0443174109184 90% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.3589403974 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.