The given material presents the pros and cons for a professor to be a part of a television program and the mere consequences that it has, directly or indirectly, on the reputation of a professor.
To begin with, as per the author he believes that it is good for the professors to be a part of the T.V. program as it gives a insight of the expert opinion to the general public regarding the topic and increase the reputation of the professor. However, the speaker believes that such activities would rather harm the image of the professor as many scholars may think that he is not serious in his work and focuses on the entertainment world rather than his field of expertise. In fact, the speaker argues that such activities would hamper him regarding various opportunities like international conferences and seminars.
Furthermore, the author believes that such activities will improve the reputation of the university and also support in the overall increment of the donation that a professor gets for his research. On the other hand, the speaker claims that it would rather waste the time of the professor as he is focused more on the travelling and rehearsal for talk shows rather than his field of expertise.
Finally, the author claims that such activities will give the expert knowledge to the lay man and they can be well known about the various facts. They can also have a detailed knowledge about the topic. But, the speaker denies the claim of the author stating that T.V. shows prefer only intellectual topic rather than an intellectual shows and they actually don't give as information as it is believed. Rather it just focuses on the general background on the topic which can be easily carried out by the reporters also.
To sum up, the speaker strongly disagrees with the claim made by the author and believes that such activities do harm to a career of an intellectual professional, like a lecturer or a professor; thus, it is wise to avoid such programs.
The passage talks about the benefits that a professor might have when he/she attends a T.V. program. However, the lecturer strongly disagrees with the author stating that such activities would rather hamper the reputation of a professor directly or indirectly.
To begin with, as per the author he believes that it is good for the professors to be a part of the T.V. program as it gives an insight of the expert opinion to the general public regarding the topic and increases the reputation of the professor. However, the speaker believes that such activities would rather harm the image of the professor as many scholars may think that he is not serious in his work and focuses on the entertainment world rather than his field of expertise. In fact, the speaker argues that such activities would hamper him regarding various opportunities like international conferences and seminars.
Furthermore, the author believes that such activities will improve the reputation of the university and also support in the overall increment of the donation that a professor gets for his research. On the other hand, the speaker claims that it would rather waste the time of the professor as he is focused more on the traveling and rehearsal for talk shows rather than his field of expertise.
Finally, the author claims that such activities will give the expert knowledge to the layman and they can be well known about the various facts. They can also have a piece of detailed knowledge about the topic. But, the speaker denies the claim of the author stating that T.V. shows prefer only intellectual topics rather than an intellectual shows and they actually don't give as information as it is believed. Rather it just focuses on the general background on the topic which can be easily carried out by the reporters also.
To sum up, the speaker strongly disagrees with the claim made by the author and believes that such activities do harm to a career of an intellectual professional, like a lecturer or a professor; thus, it is wise to avoid such programs.
- The given material presents the pros and cons for a professor to be a part of a televison program and the mere consequences that it has, directly or indirectly, on the reputation of a professor.To begin with, as per the author he believes that it is good 73
- "Young people enjoy more than older people do.' 73
- The given material presents the pros and cons for a professor to be a part of a television program and the mere consequences that it has, directly or indirectly, on the reputation of a professor.To begin with, as per the author he believes that it is good 73
- The lecture discusses about the feeding habit and the nature of R. Robustus either it is a scavenger or a hunter. The passage suggests that R. robustus have trait that make it more similar to the scavangers . But the lecturer states that there are many ev 60
- Altruism and altruism acts.... 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 166, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...an insight of the expert opinion to the general public regarding the topic and increases the r...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 368, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...an intellectual shows and they actually dont give as information as it is believed. ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 412, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
... give as information as it is believed. Rather it just focuses on the general backgrou...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 523, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... be easily carried out by the reporters also. To sum up, the speaker strongly disa...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, furthermore, however, may, regarding, so, thus, well, in fact, to begin with, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1710.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 346.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94219653179 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72298052526 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.439306358382 0.540411800872 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 522.9 419.366225166 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.0779119874 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.5 110.228320801 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8333333333 21.698381199 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3333333333 7.06452816374 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.247082570604 0.272083759551 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104817882382 0.0996497079465 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113466472374 0.0662205650399 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158946877745 0.162205337803 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0822918465363 0.0443174109184 186% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.3589403974 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.