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 they 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.
The reading and lecture are both about television appearances of professors. The author argues that professors are greatly benefited from television appearance. However, the lecture refuses the claim of the author. He is of the opinion that television appearance is not benefited to professors. The lecture cast doubt on the main point made in the reading by providing three reasons.
To begin with, the author stated that professors acquire a reputation as authorities in their academic fields among a much wider audience than they have on campus. Howbeit, this argument is challenged by the lecture that Television network is not interested to air intellectual class but interested only to air academic title. Thus, Television appearance does not increase the reputation of the professors.
Secondly, according to the reading universities are also benefited from such appearance. The universities receive positive publicity when their professors appear on TV. Nonetheless, This argument is challenged by the author that a professor who appears on TV is not a scholar professor. Moreover, the said professor is merely an entertainer nothing else.
Finally, The author posits that most of the television viewers normally have no contact with university professors. when professors appear on television, viewers have a chance to learn from experts. Nevertheless, Lecturer believes that such professors are not invited by education institution for important meeting or conventions. Moreover, they do no research activities reason for being a busy schedule with the television programme.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 117, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: When
... no contact with university professors. when professors appear on television, viewer...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, thus, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1359.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 239.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.68619246862 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09700318396 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548117154812 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 426.6 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.9533419036 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.9375 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.9375 21.698381199 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6875 7.06452816374 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.220712872192 0.272083759551 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0781985633173 0.0996497079465 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0303103742412 0.0662205650399 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13635185318 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0219212194737 0.0443174109184 49% => 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: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.34 53.8541721854 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.13 12.2367328918 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.