Some people claim that museums and art galleries are not needed today, because everyone can see historical objects or art works by computer. Do you agree or disagree?
It is debated that historical objects, paintings or documents are unnecessary to be stored in museums or art collectors because computing technology can handle that. This essay totally agrees with that statement because we can access to any material beyond distance and that time and expenditure can be considerably reduced.
Computers can store a number of digital prehistoric material or famous paintings around the world. That is to say that people can see various things of ancient Rome or Chinese culture, which can be attained on the Internet without having to travel to foreign countries. This will allow people to easily accumulate more historic information of different regions, thus strengthening their knowledge. For example, Australia recently launched a website serving as a library where people can see and download any old drawings of famous national painters.
Using a computer instead of going to museums or historical places fosters time and money savings. In other words, individuals have to spend hours and cash to visit and see things that were used in the past visually, which can be assuredly less time consuming by searching using a smartphone or laptop at home. But not only do museums and libraries cost tourists and residents, those can also consume millions of money from taxpayers, which can be used to tackle poverty or fund charity instead. For example, the US government reckoned that the expenditure for building a museum is relatively equal to building a small apartment for the local people. However, the allure of observing visually should be taken into consideration because watching remotely provides less realistic feelings.
In conclusion, historic preservation should be performed by digital technology instead of using facilities or institutes because it can help people see more and reducing time and money efforts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 378, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this can' or 'those cans'?
Suggestion: this can; those cans
... libraries cost tourists and residents, those can also consume millions of money from tax...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, then, thus, for example, in conclusion, in other words, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1577.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 293.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38225255973 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82191680977 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607508532423 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 495.9 506.74238477 98% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.5517841884 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.416666667 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4166666667 20.7667163134 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 7.06120827912 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227341889396 0.244688304435 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0863858787167 0.084324248473 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0509441929813 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148188265619 0.151304729494 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391325475142 0.056905535591 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.0 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.