In the passage, it mentions about the professors who is found not only in the university classrooms, offices, and libraries but also on television news program, giving commentary on latest events are benefiting themselves . The lecturer refutes the points made in the passage as following.
Firstly, about professor being benefited from appearing on television as a form of acquiring reputations in their field of authorities with wider audience than campus has been refuted by the lecturer as appearing on television is not considered good from professional point of view. Moreover, they are considered as entertainer and their fellow professor won't consider them as serious scholar. They would miss the chance of being invited to the important conference and end up being disadvantage.
Secondly, about the benefits to the universities, it sounds opposite. There is a lot of professor's time loss as they need time for reharshing, makeup and other things before appearing on television.
Thirdly, about public gaining chance to learn from the experties and hear from them, it does not happen as TV networks don't go in depth in academic details as it is boring and the materials and background shown are not much different than the reporter's daily work.
So, in this way, the lecturer opposes the specific point made in the passage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 222, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... latest events are benefiting themselves . The lecturer refutes the points made in...
^^
Line 3, column 142, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e loss as they need time for reharshing, makeup and other things before appearing...
^^
Line 4, column 120, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...them, it does not happen as TV networks dont go in depth in academic details as it i...
^^^^
Line 4, column 235, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...background shown are not much different than the reporters daily work. So, in this...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 12.0772626932 8% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1121.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 215.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21395348837 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88190261014 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.618604651163 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 344.7 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.23620309051 24% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.0456356735 49.2860985944 164% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.555555556 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8888888889 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.55555555556 7.06452816374 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.22429162291 0.272083759551 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0823508804955 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106167380831 0.0662205650399 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11281982988 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120113446721 0.0443174109184 271% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 10.7273730684 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.