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 the television appearances of professors is beneficial and also delineates the three categories that benefit from these television programs. However, the professor from the lecture opposes this and refutes each of the points stated in the article.
First, the article claims that professors greatly benefit from such television appearances as they acquire appreciation from a wide range of audience. The professor opposes this by pointing out that these programs create a bad reputation of the professor by portraying him or her as someone who spends time on entertainment and not on serious academic issues in their community. This causes the professor to loose research funding as people in his or her community think of him or her as someone who is not involved in any serious work and also the lecture states that such professors may not get invitations for important academic events, there by affecting his overall professional image.
Second, the article claims that the exposure of a professor in turn benefits the university he or she belongs to. However, the professor from the lecture refutes this point by stating that the professors who spend on such television appearances simply waste their precious time on preparing, attending and travelling for the television program, the time that they could instead spend on research work or on helping their students.
Third, the article states that the public also benefits from such programs as they do not usually have access to such professors lectures from esteemed universities. The lecture repudiates this point by stating that most television stations prefer their academic programs to be brief and light. They do not want their after dinner programs to be very technical or recondite. Hence, according to the professor from the lecture, this brief introduction of topics does not help general public who wish to gain some knowledge from such television programs.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-12-08 | predatoros | 86 | view |
| 2022-11-16 | KnockingOn | 80 | view |
| 2022-11-03 | daddy | 80 | view |
| 2022-11-03 | daddy | 75 | view |
| 2022-11-03 | John7A7 | 73 | view |
- A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting lethargy and other signs of illness After the recall the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food an 50
- Pirouettes Ballet School is the clear choice for any child Of all the dance schools in Elmtown Pirouettes has the most intensive program and our teachers have danced in the most prestigious ballet companies all over the world Many of our students have gon 50
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through la 66
- Toward the end of his life the Chevalier de Seingalt 1725 1798 wrote a long memoir recounting his life and adventures The Chevalier was a somewhat controversial figure but since he met many famous people including kings and writers his memoir has become a 80
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 408, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[3]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...community. This causes the professor to loose research funding as people in his or he...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 475, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ef introduction of topics does not help general public who wish to gain some knowledge from su...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, may, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1642.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 311.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27974276527 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76048340108 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466237942122 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 504.9 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 75.0454407797 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.272727273 110.228320801 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2727272727 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.63636363636 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.209925601298 0.272083759551 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0995286949413 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.040183152802 0.0662205650399 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15278420916 0.162205337803 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0250599392504 0.0443174109184 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 13.3589403974 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 10.7273730684 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.