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 professor are normally found in university doing their respective work and they also appear as a guest on TV news program or giving expert commentary; this appearance provide professor, university and the general public benefits. In contrast, the lecturer opposes it by providing its disadvantages of it.
Firstly, the reading claims that professors get benefits from appearing on TV like - it will increase their reputation not only in university but also in outside campus people. However, the teacher states that instead of getting more reputation, professor might lost reputation within their colleagues; they would consider professor as entertainer than a serious researcher. Additionally, professors will not be invited for any future meetings and conferences, eventually this will results in reducing their earning.
Secondly, the article posits that university also get benefited from this TV shows like - increasing reputation of university, getting more donations and potential students. The speaker refutes this point by saying that professor will spend more time on preparation of TV show and traveling this will cause negative impact on university. Because professor could not able to perform university's tasks on time.
Third, the paragraph states that general public will get very much knowledge from the well educated professor on TV. The teacher opposes this point by saying that, These TV show don't want in depth knowledge from a highly qualified professor rather they just want academic tittle from them. Professors are not doing any different task than TV reporters. Hence, general public will not get any benefit.
To sum up lecturer and article holds contradictory views.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 230, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...e provide professor, university and the general public benefits. In contrast, the lecturer opp...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 483, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'result'
Suggestion: result
...s and conferences, eventually this will results in reducing their earning. Secondly,...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 291, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... on preparation of TV show and traveling this will cause negative impact on unive...
^^
Line 5, column 340, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ll cause negative impact on university. Because professor could not able to perform uni...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 34, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...me. Third, the paragraph states that general public will get very much knowledge from the w...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 165, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this TV' or ''?
Suggestion: This TV;
...cher opposes this point by saying that, These TV show dont want in depth knowledge from ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 179, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...his point by saying that, These TV show dont want in depth knowledge from a highly q...
^^^^
Line 7, column 361, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ifferent task than TV reporters. Hence, general public will not get any benefit. To sum up ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, well, in contrast, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1465.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57034220532 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8150386964 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58174904943 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => 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: 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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.2568643586 49.2860985944 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.692307692 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2307692308 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233075678311 0.272083759551 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0849335730179 0.0996497079465 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0936259440413 0.0662205650399 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140082627992 0.162205337803 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109038483935 0.0443174109184 246% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.2367328918 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.