The author focuses on the benefits the professor, university and the public obtain from the appearance of the professors as a guest on a television news program. However, the lecturer doesn't agree with the justification made by the professor and rather presents how this activity hampers the professor, university and the public. The challenges made by the lecturer are explain below.
Firstly, the author points how the professor get benefits from the interview. According to the author, this will help to increase the reputation among the fellow professor and public because generally the professor's view is restricted to the academic journal. However, the lecturer disagree with this claim and states that the appearance of the professor on television will rather portrait him as a not serious or a person fond of entertainment. The professor will be less invited to the meeting and conferences and will receive less funds.
Second, the author points out the appearance of the professor will help to increase the reputation of the university and this would enhance more donation and will attract more applications. However, the lecturer argues that television celebrity professor will rather spend time in useless thing. The time professor puts in rehearsal, practice and make-up could be utilized in the university for teaching, research and other university business.
Lastly, the author points out the benefit the society can obtain from the professor through the real expertise and insight knowledge of the professor. But to contrary, the lecturer believes that the public won't be benefited by such activity. Lecturer states that the interview won't discuss in depth of the topic, rather it will be just be a discussion on background and brief introduction which can be well presented by the television reporter who can do a bit of insight research.
Thus although the author has tried to point out the benefits of the television interview among professor, university and society as a whole, the lecturer puts the contradictory opinion on how it will be rather harmful or useless to those three bodies.
- TOEFL integrated writing: Altruism. 3
- Do you agree or disagree?Students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends. 73
- In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jar contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod. The 85
- Some young adults want independence from their parents as soon as possible. Other young adults prefer to live with their families for a longer time. Which of these situations do you think is better? 70
- Scientists are considering the possibility of sending humans to Mars in the coming decades. Although there have been successful manned missions to the Moon in the 1960s and 1970s, Mars is 150 times further away from Earth than the Moon is. Thus the projec 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 185, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ion news program. However, the lecturer doesnt agree with the justification made by th...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 371, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'explained'.
Suggestion: explained
...The challenges made by the lecturer are explain below. Firstly, the author points ho...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 530, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun funds is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...eeting and conferences and will receive less funds. Second, the author points out...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ho can do a bit of insight research. Thus although the author has tried to point ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, so, thus, well
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 : 17.0 7.30242825607 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1783.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 338.0 270.72406181 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27514792899 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83336971893 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449704142012 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 550.8 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0358372841 49.2860985944 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.357142857 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1428571429 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.57142857143 7.06452816374 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203701275947 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0853644897059 0.0996497079465 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0521011386289 0.0662205650399 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132844590722 0.162205337803 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0592896466713 0.0443174109184 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.