the value of television appearances of universities' professors
Both the reading and the lecture discuss the outcome from professors' appearances on television, but they have contradicting views on the isssue. While the reading suggests that they are of great benefit for the professors, the universities and the general public, the lecture opposes this claim.
Firstly, the reading states that professors can acquire desired reputation as scholars, through television appearances. The lecture, on the other hand, contradicts this idea by claiming that the only reputation that professors could attain through television programs, is that of an entertainer. It further adds on to say that there are other numerous disadventages for such entertaining professors, such as ignorances from coallegues or cuts in reseach fundings.
Secondly, another point the reading makes is that professors' appearances on television benefit the universities by providing positive publicity. The lecture, on the contrary refutes this claim by stating that such appearances make a negative impact on these academic institutions. It explains that professors, in fact, waste time to prepare for a broadcast instead of using that time for research, meetings or university business.
Finally, the reading also suggests that the public gets valuable academic insight from these appearances. The lecture expresses disbelief by claiming that the material discussed on television programs is basic. As a result, the public is not exposed to any important information.
Overall, as depicted by the reading and the lecture, the issue of whether professors' television appearances are beneficial is still open to debate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-25 | Hrushikesh_Vaddoriya | 3 | view |
| 2022-09-24 | nusybah | 70 | view |
| 2021-07-17 | zahra.tmmm | 68 | view |
| 2020-12-22 | Winner_007 | 80 | view |
| 2020-12-22 | Winner_007 | 80 | view |
- It has recently been announced that a new restaurant may be built in your neighborhood. Do you support or oppose this plan? Why? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. 70
- People work because they need money to live. What are some other reasons that people work? Discuss one or more of these reasons. Use specific examples and details to support your answer. 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Playing computer games is a waste of time. Children should not be allowed to play them.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 80
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do.Do you agree or disagree? 73
- It has recently been announced that a new restaurant may be built in your neighborhood. Do you support or oppose this plan? Why? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 249, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...he professors, the universities and the general public, the lecture opposes this claim. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...blic, the lecture opposes this claim. Firstly, the reading states that profess...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...allegues or cuts in reseach fundings. Secondly, another point the reading make...
^^^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rch, meetings or university business. Finally, the reading also suggests that ...
^^^^^^
Line 10, column 281, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t exposed to any important information. Overall, as depicted by the reading and ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, second, secondly, so, still, while, in fact, such as, as a result, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1400.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 243.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.76131687243 5.08290768461 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94822203886 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06468616812 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539094650206 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 430.2 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.7850028468 49.2860985944 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 116.666666667 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4166666667 7.06452816374 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246449845478 0.272083759551 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0939430415892 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0877444503765 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143146575316 0.162205337803 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0656486548169 0.0443174109184 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.0289183223 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 12.2367328918 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.