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 professors 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 positive publicity when their professors appear on TV. When people see a knowledgeable 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 television viewers normally have no contact with university professors. When professors 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.
LISTENING SCRIPT
Lately, we’ve been seeing some professors on television. Though it’s sometimes claimed to be a good thing, we should question whether anybody really benefits from it. First of all, it’s not good for the professors themselves—not from a professional standpoint. Rightly or wrongly, a professor who appears on TV tends to get the reputation among fellow professors of being someone who is not a serious scholar— someone who chooses to entertain rather than to educate. And for that reason, TV professors may not be invited to important conferences—important meetings to discuss their academic work. They may even have difficulty getting money to do research. So for professors, being a TV celebrity has important disadvantages. A second point is that being on TV can take a lot of a professor’s time—not just the time on TV but also time figuring out what to present and time spent rehearsing, travel time, even time getting made up to look good for the cameras. And all this time comes out of the time the professor can spend doing research, meeting with students, and attending to university business. So you can certainly see there are problems for the university and its students when professors are in the TV studio and not on campus. So who does benefit? The public? That’s not so clear either. Look, professors do have a lot of knowledge to offer, but TV networks don’t want really serious in-depth academic lectures for after-dinner viewing. What the networks want is the academic title, not the intellectual substance. The material that professors usually present on TV—such as background on current events, or some brief historical introduction to a new movie version of a great literary work—this material is not much different from what viewers would get from a TV reporter who had done a little homework.
The article states that TV appearance by professor is of great benifit to the professor, the university, and to the public. However, the lecture refutes it completely.
First, the lecture refutes it stating it hardly offer any benifits to the professor. The professor who appears on TV is looked among his/her own peers as one who isn't serious, one who chooses to entertain rather than educate. The lecture states that such professor might not get invitation to important events of academic value. This might affect their ability to get money for conducting research.
Second, the lecture states appearing on TV costs time. The time to travel, research and rehearse on the topic to be presented and even the time to get ready to look good in front of the camera. The time wasted could be potentially employed to meet with students, conduct classes and carry out research. Hence, TV appearance by the professor is not good for the University also.
Finally, it isn't good for the general public as well. TV networks who invite a professor to a show, are usually looking for something fun for after prime time. They are more interested in the academic title than the intellect. They are looking for someone to comment on current event, or like a new movie version of an important literature. These are hardly any different from a good TV report by a scrupulous journalist who has spent time in researching the story.
That's how the lecture disagrees with the article's conclusion of TV appearance by a professor are of any value.
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station. Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 58
- Some people believe that increasing violence in the media is the cause of increasing violence in our society, especially among children. Others believe that children's peer groups and parental role models are a much more influence on children's behavior. 70
- Distance learning and online computer classes should replace classroom learning. 73
- PROMPT: All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. Write a response in which 16
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permi 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 49, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'offers'?
Suggestion: offers
...he lecture refutes it stating it hardly offer any benifits to the professor. The prof...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 162, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...oked among his/her own peers as one who isnt serious, one who chooses to entertain r...
^^^^
Line 3, column 372, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...rofessor is not good for the University also. Finally, it isnt good for the general...
^^^^
Line 4, column 13, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...d for the University also. Finally, it isnt good for the general public as well. TV...
^^^^
Line 4, column 31, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ty also. Finally, it isnt good for the general public as well. TV networks who invite a profe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 211, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...re interested in the academic title than the intellect. They are looking for some...
^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...s spent time in researching the story. Thats how the lecture disagrees with the arti...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 42, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'articles'' or 'article's'?
Suggestion: articles'; article's
...hats how the lecture disagrees with the articles conclusion of TV appearance by a profes...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'finally', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'second', 'so', 'well']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.252595155709 0.261695866417 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.155709342561 0.158904122519 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0692041522491 0.0723426182421 96% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0588235294118 0.0435111971325 135% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0242214532872 0.0277247811725 87% => OK
Prepositions: 0.117647058824 0.128828473217 91% => OK
Participles: 0.0346020761246 0.0370669169778 93% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.6381974395 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0449826989619 0.0208969081088 215% => Less infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.00346020761246 0.00154638098197 224% => OK
Determiners: 0.121107266436 0.128158765124 94% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0103806228374 0.0158828679856 65% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0207612456747 0.0114777025283 181% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1526.0 1645.83664459 93% => OK
No of words: 261.0 271.125827815 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.84674329502 6.08160592843 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04852973271 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.360153256705 0.374372842146 96% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.287356321839 0.287516216867 100% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.180076628352 0.187439937562 96% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.134099616858 0.113142543107 119% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6381974395 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540229885057 0.539623497131 100% => OK
Word variations: 53.0192019186 53.8517498576 98% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0529801325 123% => OK
Sentence length: 16.3125 21.7502111507 75% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.1314178848 49.3711431718 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.375 132.220823453 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.3125 21.7502111507 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.625 0.878197800319 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 3.39072847682 236% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 45.0481321839 50.5018328374 89% => OK
Elegance: 1.69565217391 1.90840788429 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239466214229 0.549887131256 44% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.123118561964 0.142949733639 86% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.109114439334 0.0787303798458 139% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.557694464169 0.631733273073 88% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.181218598153 0.139662658121 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0941694435537 0.266732575781 35% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587046979569 0.103435571967 57% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.337925554377 0.414875509568 81% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0715705553262 0.0530846634433 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144338238176 0.40443939384 36% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0657827039096 0.0528353158467 125% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.26048565121 70% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 3.49668874172 143% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.62251655629 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 3.1766004415 94% => OK
Total topic words: 10.0 10.2958057395 97% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.