More information available online so library books are useless, agree or disagree with statement?
Recently, the phenomenon of online information and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of internet based data are highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that scientific data-base websites can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, many public libraries can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of digitized study, as well as modern searching methods, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the useless library in the case of widely online information sources. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both E-books publishers and useful online publications apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, bad quality printed books might increase the consequences of unnecessary paper usage. Moreover, fundamental aspects of useless books would relate to this reality that the demerits of non-recyclable papers pertain to lack of knowledge. As an example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of publication deficiency problem is correlated negatively with unreliable newspaper facts. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of useless information.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of online research far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of book references prove the significance of reliable data, but also pinpoint long-term implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1538.0 1207.87684729 127% => OK
No of words: 268.0 242.827586207 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73880597015 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21052547489 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.679104477612 0.580463131201 117% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 379.143842365 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0867200967 50.4703680194 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.166666667 104.977214359 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 20.9669160288 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 2.75862068966 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.179332675934 0.242375264174 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0570619084561 0.0925447433944 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0396750063257 0.071462118173 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0930756978811 0.151781067708 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0488625005957 0.0609392437508 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 12.6369458128 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 53.1260098522 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.31 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.21 8.32886699507 135% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 55.0591133005 200% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.