Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they oppose specific points made in the reading passage.
Both the reading passage and the lecture is about university professors on television. While the reading passage discusses the advantages of professors on TV for variety of groups, the lecturer argues about them and target the points and assumptions stated in the reading passage.
Firstly, the reading passage metions that the professors on TV is advantages to professors themselves. However, the lecturer thinks differently. She states that the image of the professor who appears of TV, amongst the fellow professors decreases. This is because they think that he/she is not a scholar and thus joined entertainment sector. As a result, he or she might not be invited to important meetings or conferences which might not be good for the professor's reputation.
Secondly, the reading passage mentions that it would also benefit the universities. However, the lecturer states that the professor would have less time. He/she might have to rehearse on what to present during the show or increased time to commute to the TV station or he/she might have to wear make up and look good and of course the TV show would also consume time. As a result of all these time consuming event, the professor will definitely have less time to attend to university issues or might not be able to provide time to the doubts of the students. This might not be good for universities too.
Lastly, it would not be good for public too. Since the professor has prepared a lecture or presentation for general audience, who do not require a very heavy and in-depth lectures, and not the scholars, he/she would not have covered the depth required to fully grasp the topic. For example, suppose the professor is trying to review a classic movie from perspective of literature. Since, the professor won't be going into the depths of connection between literature and the movie, the amount of information shared by the professor will not be that much useful and new. Furthermore, it is possible that similar information can be provided by a journalist who has done the homework.
To conclude, the lecture opposes the points made in the reading passage as evident above. For this it is clear that according to the lecture, none of the three i.e professor, university and public is benefitted from the show on TV done by a university professor.
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they oppose specific points made in the reading passage 73
- It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero 50
- 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 period most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station s coverage of weather and lo 60
- Claim No act is done purely for the benefit of others Reason All actions even those that seem to be done for other people are based on self interest 58
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they oppose specific points made in the reading passage 78
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 456, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...erences which might not be good for the professors reputation. Secondly, the reading pa...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, look, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, of course, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 7.30242825607 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1933.0 1373.03311258 141% => OK
No of words: 389.0 270.72406181 144% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96915167095 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.04702891845 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75661605443 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 145.348785872 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.462724935733 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 603.9 419.366225166 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.2040064875 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.736842105 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4736842105 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94736842105 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1657886404 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717215648262 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101385273382 0.0662205650399 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120884874819 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0721826668969 0.0443174109184 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 456, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...erences which might not be good for the professors reputation. Secondly, the reading pa...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, look, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, of course, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 7.30242825607 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1933.0 1373.03311258 141% => OK
No of words: 389.0 270.72406181 144% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96915167095 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.04702891845 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75661605443 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 145.348785872 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.462724935733 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 603.9 419.366225166 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.2040064875 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.736842105 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4736842105 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94736842105 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1657886404 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717215648262 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101385273382 0.0662205650399 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120884874819 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0721826668969 0.0443174109184 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.