Public libraries should only provide books and should not waste their limited resources on expensive high-tech media such as software, videos or DVDs. Do you agree or disagree?
With the proliferation of high-tech media, some people hold that the public libraries would be rendered obsolete if they do not offer software, videos or DVDs to their users while other assert it's only a waste of limited resources and the libraries should offer books only.
High-tech media is, in many ways, indeed superior to the books in terms of entertainment, attraction and functionality. For instance, videos and DVDs function as a visual means to assist people to have a first-hand experience even though those people have not physically visited or seen the objects which are introduced in books. Also, despite the audio-visual equipment would be prohibitive to install, the capital cost would be lowered by appealing to a sizable number of users.
More importantly, software could assist the library goers to access the internet to update their knowledge on a daily basis; in contrast, books typically take multiple months to be published, which in turn render their contents outdated to some extent. In addition, upon learning that the computer literacy has become an essential skill recently, public libraries should take on the responsibility to educate its users how to operate a computer.
Furthermore, it is common practice for most public libraries to share their resources via the Internet. In this way, even if one book of interest cannot be found in one library, the borrower still could locate the book from other libraries and then request the libraries to transfer the book to that particular library.
In conclusion, public libraries would benefit in multiple ways if they are equipped with the high-tech media.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 103, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... if they are equipped with the high-tech media.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, so, still, then, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1383.0 1615.20841683 86% => OK
No of words: 264.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23863636364 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7870320478 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.598484848485 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 430.2 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 16.0721442886 56% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 20.2975951904 143% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.1532848717 49.4020404114 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.666666667 106.682146367 144% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.3333333333 20.7667163134 141% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.8888888889 7.06120827912 168% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.328310420237 0.244688304435 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126971452189 0.084324248473 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104208273858 0.0667982634062 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184491677861 0.151304729494 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106772434838 0.056905535591 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 50.2224549098 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.86 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 78.4519038076 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 9.78957915832 189% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.1190380762 134% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.