The article states that the professors not only attends the university classes, do research but also appear on T.V programmes which could prove beneficial for the university reputation, professor's reputation and public too. However, the lecturer refutes this claim by stating that this benefit is merely questionable and provides three reasons which invalidate the above claim.
First, the articles states that, attending T.V programmes benefits professor's reputation by making the content available to wider audience. However, the lecturer denies this claim. He explains that such professors could be considered not serious about their work and appear on television for the sake of entertainment. So, they would not be allowed or invited to attend some of the important meetings, conferences considering their insincerity towards their work.
Second, the article posits that, the university reputation is benefited greatly when a professor of that university appears on such programmes. But, the lecturer repudiates this claim. According to the lecturer, the time required to travel to the studio, to get ready to look presentable on television, rehearsing the content to be spoken reduces the professor's time to do some important research work. This in turn has bad effect on the university as professors are considered lineant of their work.
Third, the articles claims that, such television programmes helps a wider range of audience and knowledge reaches to large number of people. The lecturer however opposes this claim by saying that it is merely a misconception. According to the lecturer, the television broadcasters do not want any in-depth knowledge of any topic to be presented but only want the title of the topic. Also, if detailed content is not presented, dispersion of knowledge will not take place. This type of content presentation can also be done by a well prepared T.V reporter and there is no need of a professor to do so.
In conclusion, the article and lecture both are regarding the appearance of professors on T.V programmes. However, the claims made by the article are effectively challenged by the lecturer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 114, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: V
...asses, do research but also appear on T.V programmes which could prove beneficial...
^
Line 2, column 45, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: V
..., the articles states that, attending T.V programmes benefits professors reputati...
^
Line 2, column 370, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...uld not be allowed or invited to attend some of the important meetings, conferences conside...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 271, Rule ID: LOOK_WATCH[3]
Message: Did you mean 'watch'?
Suggestion: watch
...o travel to the studio, to get ready to look presentable on television, rehearsing t...
^^^^
Line 4, column 544, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: V
...n can also be done by a well prepared T.V reporter and there is no need of a prof...
^
Line 5, column 92, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: V
...rding the appearance of professors on T.V programmes. However, the claims made by...
^
Line 5, column 190, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...effectively challenged by the lecturer.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, regarding, second, so, third, well, in conclusion
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 : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1807.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 337.0 270.72406181 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36201780415 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95202864818 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501483679525 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 564.3 419.366225166 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4179267866 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.294117647 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8235294118 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05882352941 7.06452816374 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.165346120617 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624832070583 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0386518879559 0.0662205650399 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108119235558 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0258147119524 0.0443174109184 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 53.8541721854 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.