Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Numerous people consider that the development of modern technology can facilitate virtual and online libraries, which will put an end to the existence of traditional libraries. Although I believe that the advent of new technology has eliminated citizens’ needs to visit traditional libraries, they will never become redundant.
Admittedly, technological innovation has reduced the importance of traditional libraries. The main reason for this phenomenon is that virtual libraries provide people with almost all kinds of books or reading materials that they need to study, while the limited space of traditional libraries prevents them from accommodating a variety of old and state-of-the-art printed documents. Another reason for this is that traditional libraries only serve the public at a certain time during the day. By contrast, online libraries allow people to have instant access to material sources at any time from the comfort of their home by using modern tools such as computers and tablets. This requires traditional libraries to be well equipped with modern facilities to offer the public more digitized documents and more flexibility.
Nevertheless, despite the benefits of online libraries, I believe that computer technology cannot substitute public libraries completely. One key factor that drives people to visit traditional libraries is the need for quiet space and an inspiring atmosphere for studying and reading. Particularly, students find it easy and effective to concentrate on their work while they are in public libraries. Another important point is that it is difficult to read books for a long time on a digital screen. This can result in a range of health problems from eye strain to backache. However, with a book issued from a library, people can enjoy reading and touching this paper document from the comfort of their bed. Moreover, access to virtual libraries can be affected by power cut or internet disconnection, which can interrupt people while studying or completing their school assignments.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that computer technology will never replace traditional libraries but transform them into modern libraries where people can both pay a visit or have online access.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, so, well, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 344.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55523255814 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01738584883 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526162790698 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 594.0 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.8323794124 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.4 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9333333333 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 7.06120827912 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172384467751 0.244688304435 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0669805835987 0.084324248473 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435953251357 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120616272488 0.151304729494 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0434979543023 0.056905535591 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 9.78957915832 169% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.