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 article states that by appearing on television shows, professors are providing various benefits and gives three reasons of support. However, the lecture explains that it is not beneficial for a professor to appear on television and refutes each of the author’s claims.
First, the reading claims that by appearing on television, professors are benefiting themselves. The article cites this by saying that the professors receive authoritative reputations in their academic fields. The lecture refutes this claim by saying that such professors are seriously undermined by other professors in the university. The other professors think of them as entertainers and not as researchers. Subsequently, the professors are not invited to conferences and they even find it difficult to get money for their research.
Second, the article posits that universities are also benefited by the appearance of professors on television. It states that when people see knowledgeable faculty from a university in a television show, they think highly of the university which eventually increases the donations of the university and the number of applications from potential students. However, the lecturer refutes this claim by saying those professors are wasting a lot of valuable time. They could have utilized that time doing research, attending university’s business and spending time with students.
Third, the reading says that the general public are also benefited from the appearance of professors on television. The viewer’s learn from the experts and have a chance to get exposed to the knowledge which they could not have learned on their own. The lecturer opposes this point by explaining that the TV shows do not provide in-depth academic contents in their show but are only using the academic title.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 337, 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.
... by other professors in the university. The other professors think of them as enter...
^^^
Line 13, column 34, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... Third, the reading says that the general public are also benefited from the appearance ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => 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: 1550.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55555555556 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08054455519 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501792114695 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 477.0 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.6503787552 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.714285714 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9285714286 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.42857142857 7.06452816374 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262978131635 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0961795489988 0.0996497079465 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0327974305251 0.0662205650399 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167618333551 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0364161493366 0.0443174109184 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 53.8541721854 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 12.2367328918 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.