Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
In past few decades, the computer technologies have taken a rise. Thus, the introduction of internet in the world has changed everyone’s perspective to look at the things. Technology has provided us a flexible way to read the books instead of following a traditional way of issuing books at libraries. But I am completely disagreed that libraries are redundant because they can be replaced by plethora of technical advancements nowadays. Below essay will shed some light about my opinion.
First, by observing some advantages of technologies, reading or issuing books at the libraries is a time consuming and an obsolete way. On the contrast, by using the internet, people can find any books within a fraction of seconds. Today’s youngsters consider the internet as an inevitable source of information. Thus, people can find any type of data from any corner of the world which is, just a click away.
Secondly, a public library infrastructure can be maintained by some local authorities in the towns, so they have fixed opened hours. Technologies can replace this time constraint because computer and internet can be available twenty-four by seven all over the world.
Despite having disadvantages, public libraries can have some vital advantages too. They can provide you peaceful environments to study which computer technology is unable to guarantee. In addition, the older generations are skeptical to handle techno gadgets at ease. They often face difficulties to read on the screens. Conversely, reading pages one-by-one of the books can be a satisfactory experience for them. Moreover, libraries can help to develop the reading habits in young minds instead of spending more time on the computer screens or on cellphones.
To conclude, libraries are essential parts of a society, and they help to collect the information and save it for future generations even in this competitive world. For this reason, libraries cannot be replaced with any other establishments.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1668.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 314.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31210191083 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09681240453 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576433121019 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.7134853391 49.4020404114 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.7894736842 106.682146367 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5263157895 20.7667163134 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.36842105263 7.06120827912 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 3.4128256513 264% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218961330696 0.244688304435 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650702738086 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0598986530519 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126547876602 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.062127357282 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.