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 profes- sors 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 posi- tive publicity when their professors appear on TV. When people see a knowledge- able 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 tele- vision viewers normally have no contact with university professors. When profes- sors 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 lecture states that the University Professors appearing on television has a positive effect neither for the Professor nor for the University. The lecture, in fact, claims that this practice has negative effects. This is in contradiction to what the passage asserts.
First, the lecture states that by appearing on the television, a professor can be considered as a superficial professional not having enough dedication towards academics by the fellow professors. Consequently, the professor might not be invited to academic and research conferences and also the fund to pursue research would be withheld. These claims by the lecture opposes the passage which states that television appearances of the professor would help build good reputation beyond the University as well.
Second, the lecture asserts that a professor would have to invest a lot of time to prepare for a television show. The professor would have to curate the content for the show, travel to the venue and even spend substantial time applying make-up for the show. The professor, instead, could spend the same time pursuing research, engaging with the students and participating in business activities of the University. However, the passage states that, in contrast, the television shows by the professor would help elevate the University’s reputation in the general public which can lead to increase in donations and applications from potential students.
Finally, the lecture claims that the television shows by the professors would not be any different from the shows hosted by television reporters who have done sufficient homework. The lecture supports this by saying that the television shows cannot showcase high intellectual content as the shows are meant for the general public. As a result, the professors have to be superficial in their talk which can also be done by television reporters provided they have done sufficient homework. These claims oppose the passage which asserts that the shows by the professors are highly intellectual in nature rather than superficial and the general public would get exposed to ideas otherwise would not have.
| 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 |
- Blue Highway 58
- Chevalier memoir 70
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws 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 66
- We can learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take 66
- Some people argue that successful leaders in government industry or other fields must be highly competitive Other people claim that in order to be successful a leader must be willing and able to cooperate with others Write a response in which you discuss 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 554, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...vate the University’s reputation in the general public which can lead to increase in donations...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 316, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... content as the shows are meant for the general public. As a result, the professors have to be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 634, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... nature rather than superficial and the general public would get exposed to ideas otherwise wo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, however, if, second, so, well, in contrast, in fact, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1811.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 334.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42215568862 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91224422219 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449101796407 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 559.8 419.366225166 133% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9392153393 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.357142857 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8571428571 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.14285714286 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155259361635 0.272083759551 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0663711777086 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0440625771301 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111642529853 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.022060634384 0.0443174109184 50% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.3589403974 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.