Please check my integrated writing task

This is integrated writing task, practice test 2, The official guide to the TOEFL test, ETS

The reading states that appearing professors as guests on TV is beneficial, and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor professes that the argument is problematic, and refutes the article’s reasons.

First, the reading claims that professors on TV may attract more audiences. The professor disclaims the point by stating that these appearances don’t benefit the professors from professional viewpoint, and they may cause serious problems. Professors may be regarded not serious scholars, and may be considered as persons who love entertainment. This may cause them to not be invited in important academic conferences, and also not be given money to do researches.

Second, the reading affirms that the programs will benefit the universities by providing them more donation, more applicants, and so on. The professor disaffirms the point by stating that the TV programs take a lot of time from professors. A time to be ready for what to present, a time for travel, a time for made up to look better on TV, and so on. This waste of time may harm professors’ academic programs and their students as well.

Third, the reading avers that the programs are good for public and give them the chance to learn. The professor rebuts the point by stating that it’s not clear that the programs benefit the public, because TV viewers don’t want serious and deep discusses for after dinner time. Therefore, the public don’t earn much more than a TV reporter speech, who didn’t have done a lot of homework like the professors.

TOEFL listening lectures: The lecturer uses the Gandara culture as an example of what?

Here is a link to the reading and lecture for this question:

I thought you did a very good job with this one. Your structure is correct and you capture all of the main points as well as the secondary details from the lecture. You have a few mistakes in usage though and a few other sentences, that are not quite correct and so sound a little stilted. Overall, I would rate this a 4.5 out of 5.