The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books and they shouldn’t waste their limited resources and space on providing expensive hi-tech media such as computer software, videos and DVDs. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Although it is true that the primary objective of public libraries is to maintain a wide collection of books from numerous genre. However, in my opinion, in today’s technologically advanced times, it is also essential for them to upgrade themselves with the fast moving time and provide cutting-edge means of sharing information in the form of soft-media, audio, and videos.
On the one hand, there are few reasons behind people suggesting traditional libraries to avoid using technology. Technology, firstly, is expensive and require huge initial investments to get it set up, and not all libraries can afford such a big scale of investment. Therefore, they tend to focus on maintaining existing assets rather than moving towards fancy technology. Secondly, these people also think that having the latest hi-tech media might deviate the society from the actual purpose of the libraries. In their opinion, if libraries cater to various entertainment media like video and audios, then the primary purpose of a library would be killed and people would consider them as a means of entertainment only rather than for the sake of learning.
The people’s reasoning stated above are understandable but obviously mistaken, as technology, on the other hand, has enormous potential to have a positive influence on the way the information is shared. For instance, the latest devices such as DVD, CD and USB drives can store a huge collection of the entire library resources on a single device of less than 12-centimeter size. Furthermore, the technology allows the content to be presented in a plethora of interesting forms such as video documentaries, movies, speeches etc. as a result, people can enjoy and learn at the same time. Consequently, more and more people will get attracted towards them. Coming to the make point related to financial investment, it is undeniable fact that the initial cost of investment is big, however, the return of investment is much greater than the initial investment, as once set up, the technology has proven to be reliable and durable and can last for at least a couple of decades.
For the reasons mentioned above, it can be concluded that the traditional libraries are obsolete and outdated. Therefore, enabling them with the advanced technology must be encouraged and should be considered as a positive development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” 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.
Although it is true that the primary objective o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 151, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r hand, has enormous potential to have a positive influence on the way the inform...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, at least, for instance, such as, as a result, in my opinion, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1990.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 379.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25065963061 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03651175614 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551451187335 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 630.9 506.74238477 125% => 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: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 69.5619308402 49.4020404114 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.666666667 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2666666667 20.7667163134 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.0666666667 7.06120827912 185% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.136287852311 0.244688304435 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0422506613516 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0328433684449 0.0667982634062 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0820160294682 0.151304729494 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0440993448248 0.056905535591 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 78.4519038076 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.