The reading and the lecture are both about professors appearing as guest in television shows. The author of the reading is of the opinion that such participation brings about advantage not only for the professor but also the university and public in general. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. She is of the opinion that such participation in literal sense do not bring about any incremental advantage.
To begin with, the author feels that such involvement in television shows increases the reputation and importance of the professor. The article also says that such shows are watched by thousands of people which is not the same as an academic article in a journal. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. She claims that such participation might degrade the reputation of the professor and display him more as an entertainer than a professor. Additionally, she also says that this can have a negative effect on him such as not being invited to important meetings, conferences and lack of funding for research.
Secondly, the author states that the university has an increased publicity through such medium. The article also mentions that such shows can make one consider the university to be deemed and lead to rise in donations and contributions. However, the lecturer completely rebuts this point by mentioning that due to such involvement, professors invest most of their time in rehearsals, appearance, travelling and so on. She elaborates on this by saying that such time can be effectively used in research or to help students by staying in the campus.
Finally, the author posits that the public can establish connection between experts in academic field through such medium. This might help them gain insight and exposure. In contrast, the lecturer states that the television media are not usually interested in serious academic content and are merely attracted to the academic title. She also mentions that such superficial content on any interesting topic can also be easily delivered by a reporter with the help of little research and does not necessarily involve any academic expert's contribution.
- A true university education encompasses far more than the narrow, specialized study of a single discipline. Only through exploring the broad spectrum of liberal arts courses can students become truly learned. 66
- TPO 18 Integrated 85
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do. 73
- TPO-18: students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends 73
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 260, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...o the university and public in general. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Line 3, column 421, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...n of the professor and display him more as an entertainer than a professor. Additi...
^^
Line 7, column 529, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
...es not necessarily involve any academic experts contribution.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, in contrast, in general, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1809.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 347.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21325648415 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89535163095 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484149855908 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 571.5 419.366225166 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.2390803892 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.411764706 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4117647059 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06452816374 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.152559375794 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0540327955137 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0446018795484 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0981838792415 0.162205337803 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.022294081664 0.0443174109184 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.