Author suggested that the idea of converting the Northside branch of the Library System to the computer training center for public use is a good idea. However, the author fails to give provide a sufficient amount of information for the valuation of the argument.
Computer skills are important according to trends, but there is no evidence that the current trends are these trends. Author did not mention any survey or study which justifies that computer skills are national trends. So, turning the facility into the training center and wasting the huge library area for the same thing is not a good idea if these trends are older trends. Therefore, it is important to validate the trends before the conversion of the library facility.
Secondly, even if computer-skills are necessary for today's world, he has not given us boastful evidence about the need for the skills in the county city. Nowhere it is mentioned that the people in the county need to have these skills. If the people are already acquainted with the skills or they are in no need to have such a skill set. In that case, the training facility will not be useful.
He has also not considered the presence of other training facilities nearby. What if there are other facilities and they are sufficient for the people? Moreover, if there are other facilities nearby and those are cost-effective than this new facility then people might not show up for the training center. If it is not validated then the conversion of a widely used library branch to training will not again be a good idea.
Again for the adequate amount of the volumes they have claimed that other nearby branches will be enough and sufficient. But there is no substantial evidence that these branches have all the books and material people need today and they might need it in the future. Also, if the books from one branch take more time to get it this branch then people might develop an aversion for this branch. In order to convert a branch into training facility, this should be taken into consideration.
To strengthen the argument the author should have surveyed for the need for the training center, should consider the people's need and the current as well as future needs for the library. After all these considerations it can be concluded that the decision of converting the branch into the training center is a good idea.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 408 350
No. of Characters: 1924 1500
No. of Different Words: 167 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.494 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.716 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.471 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.911 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.599 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.131 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 307, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ht not show up for the training center. If it is not validated then the conversion...
^^
Line 11, column 188, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s well as future needs for the library. After all these considerations it can be conc...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, after all, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1973.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 408.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83578431373 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5255792043 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.424019607843 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 616.5 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.6611007163 57.8364921388 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.65 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123532719071 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0454968251529 0.0743258471296 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0423324912104 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0729271840905 0.128457276422 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0341305899469 0.0628817314937 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.