There is a debatable issue regarding academic publishing access for society, whether fully opened for all or restricted for particular person. I prefer that it should be accessible rather than restricted with some evidences described below.
On one hand, people think that scientific innovation and research should be limited access in order to respect the researchers. This is because innovations and academic references are precious matters for scientists. Moreover, in this era when information spread quickly, piracy and plagiarism have been increased dramatically. Giving restricted access of academic publications is one of endeavor to protect it. For instance, in some journal websites, journals are only published particularly. If readers want to read it fully, they have to pay to the writers of journals. This method have been proven effectively reduce piracy and plagiarism and give income for the professors that already made those academic writing. Furthermore, they also feel get some respects from public.
On the other hand, people suppose that access of knowledge should be opened freely to reduce gap of knowledge among individuals. This is because some people receive access of knowledge easily while other difficult to obtain it. This evidence affect the development of human resources that relatively imbalance in different region. One of popular phenomenon regarding this event is the difference of human resources between people who live in big cities with full access of information and people who lived in suburban areas with limited access of academic references. Those occurrences could be reduced by giving all access of knowledge for all people in all areas easily using some strategic steps. Then, for long-term human resources quality could be relatively same.
In short, although it might seems sensible that academic discoveries should be shared strictly I believe it should be published and shared freely for all people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 495, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...urnals are only published particularly. If readers want to read it fully they have...
^^
Line 5, column 243, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'affects'.
Suggestion: affects
...r difficult to obtain it. This evidence affect the development of human resources that...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 22, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...elatively same. In short, although it might seems sensible that academic disco...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, if, moreover, regarding, so, then, while, for instance, in short, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1664.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 301.0 315.596192385 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52823920266 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79602797389 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.544850498339 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 533.7 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7347863004 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.8823529412 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7058823529 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.165547939461 0.244688304435 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0539507929145 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0412925626851 0.0667982634062 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109446882665 0.151304729494 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0409340802718 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.0946893788 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.5 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => 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.