professor appearance of television
Both the reading passage and listening discuss whether the professors appearing on television is beneficial for readers or not. The former argues that this practise has three significant benefits, but the latter contradicts each of these points.
First, the article claims that appearing on television helps acquire good reputations for professor and even gain much wider audience then they have on campus. Furthermore, it is stated that when professor share their ideas with television audience the professor's ideas are enhanced. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that instead of gaining reputation professor is shown unprofessional and not serious. Additionally, he points out that professor can be shown as entertainer rather than educator.
Second, the writer asserts that university also has advantages from professor's appearance as they can receive positive publicity and think more good for the university. On top of that, author adds that more donation will be received for the university and more application from potential students. However, the professor rebuts that professor will waste his time in things like what to present or how to look good on television. Further, he remarks that instead of wasting time on television professor should attend time to meet university requirements and attend academic meetings.
Finally, the text contends that most of the television viewers normally do not have contact with university professor as by television public can get chance to learn from experts. Moreover, it is highlighted that television is generally a medium for commentary that tends to be superficial and not deep therefore by professor viewers can get taste of real expertise. On the other hand, the speaker argues that television don't want depth academic lectures they only want academic titles which they can enjoy after their dinner.
As you can see from above, the author and lecturer hold very different views on the topic television appearance are beneficial or not for professors themselves as well as to their university and the general public.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-18 | M. MEHRABI KERMANI | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-15 | M. MEHRABI KERMANI | 83 | view |
| 2023-07-13 | M. MEHRABI KERMANI | 75 | view |
| 2023-07-13 | M. MEHRABI KERMANI | 3 | view |
| 2023-07-06 | nilav | 71 | view |
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities Recently we signed a contract with the Fly Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our warehouse i 58
- Students are influenced by their teachers than by their friends 70
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to 58
- In the 1950s Torreya Taxifolia a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida started to die out No one is sure exactly what caused the decline but chances are good that if nothing is done Torreya will soon become extinct Experts are co 80
- professor appearance of television 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 405, Rule ID: LOOK_WATCH[3]
Message: Did you mean 'watch'?
Suggestion: watch
...n things like what to present or how to look good on television. Further, he remarks...
^^^^
Line 7, column 422, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...and, the speaker argues that television dont want depth academic lectures they only ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 200, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... as well as to their university and the general public.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, second, so, then, therefore, well, as to, as well as, on the other hand, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1786.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44512195122 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83621807282 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 145.348785872 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557926829268 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 552.6 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.9146867985 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.066666667 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8666666667 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4 7.06452816374 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.458911467678 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156852214229 0.0996497079465 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110229048628 0.0662205650399 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.273153409059 0.162205337803 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0479801052309 0.0443174109184 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.3589403974 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.