The lecture questions the reading that shows the television appearances of professors can be beneficial for professors, universities, and the general public by providing three reasons.
First, although the reading suggests that professors can improve their reputation and authority by appearing on TV, the lecture argues that their television appearance damages their academic status. She explains that the professors who attend on TV programs are not considered as a serious scholar but as an entertainer. As a result, TV professors are less likely to be invited to important conferences of their study and to be supported with research funds.
Second, the lecture points out that television appearance consumes the valuable time of professors, which deprives of their time for teaching students, for doing research on campus, and for attending university business. While the reading claims that the television appearance of professors leads the university to gain positive publicity and a potential increase in donation and application, the lecture clarifies that the professors should prioritize their time to help students by working on campus rather than taking their time to travel and to prepare for their presentations and for dressing up to record the program.
Third, the lecture clarifies that the general public cannot benefit from the television appearance of professors because the contents of the program do not provide in-depth knowledge. She argues that TV stations ask professors to attend TV programs to gain academic titles and credibility of the programs rather than to educate the public with more academic content. Therefore, regardless of the television appearance of professors, the public can only receive general knowledge such as background on current events or brief historical summary of literary work through those programs which are intended to entertain the audience.
Likewise, the lecture refutes the reading suggesting that professors, universities, and the general public can benefit from professors’ appearing on television by revealing the truth that it is beneficial only for television stations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...l for professors, universities, and the general public by providing three reasons. First, al...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 462, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd to be supported with research funds. Second, the lecture points out that tele...
^^^
Line 3, column 625, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... for dressing up to record the program. Third, the lecture clarifies that the ge...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 39, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... Third, the lecture clarifies that the general public cannot benefit from the television appe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 633, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...are intended to entertain the audience. Likewise, the lecture refutes the readin...
^^^
Line 5, column 93, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... that professors, universities, and the general public can benefit from professors’ appearing ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 236, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eneficial only for television stations.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, likewise, second, so, therefore, third, while, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1825.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 322.0 270.72406181 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66770186335 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98184034795 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484472049689 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 558.9 419.366225166 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.742558158 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 182.5 110.228320801 166% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.2 21.698381199 148% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3 7.06452816374 117% => 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 : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.25405354731 0.272083759551 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113275500581 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0385600765147 0.0662205650399 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145410143647 0.162205337803 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0357074495615 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.4 13.3589403974 160% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.54 53.8541721854 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.0289183223 154% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.2 12.2367328918 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.7273730684 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.