Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
Amid the proliferation of science and technology, whether traditional libraries should be maintained is a hotly-debated topic that often divides opinion. My conviction is that together with highly reliable knowledge included, public libraries have important functions that artificial intelligence cannot perform so retaining them can neither become redundant nor money-wasting.
It is worth noticing that physical libraries are a form of encouragement of reading culture provided by either governments or the whole society to people, especially to the young. Myriad research from reliable resources around the world has proved the outstanding benefits of reading books compared to sitting on screens for hours; therefore, every year, many financial sources are subsidised to physical libraries, especially in educative institutes. Besides, senior residents who are not familiar with hi-tech tools and appliances cannot easily immerse themselves in online reading. Taking senior citizens in Vietnam as an example, they are found being confronted with obstacles when adapting to modern technologies including reading facilities such as smartphones, tablets, etc. thus being engrossed in virtual books appears a daunting task.
Another reason for supporting traditional libraries is their provision of a peaceful and relaxed ambience, given the relentless repercussions of intensifying noise pollution in urban areas. Not only does enjoying this atmosphere facilitate comers to stay focused but it also triggers their effort and motivation for studying while observing others engrossed in expanding their knowledge through books. In addition, whereas papers works presented in public libraries are strictly censored, the reliability of online sources of information is of great concern. Currently, much virtual content people are exposed to has not gone through any trustworthy examination, which is attributed to the increase of deviance and misinterpretation of many basic moral principles. Coupled with various distractions such as commercial ads and entertaining flyers attached to almost every website, the suspicious information available highly has the gullible public strayed off course.
In conclusion, since numerous viable advantages are provided, traditional libraries should continuously be subsidised and preserved, regardless of the advancement of virtual tools for online reading.
- Museums and art galleries should concentrate on works that show history and culture of their own country rather than works of the other parts in the world To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Cyclists and car drivers sharing the same roads causes some problems What are the problems and what can be done to reduce them 89
- Increasing travels between countries enable people to learn different cultures or to increase tension between people from different countries 90
- People living in large cities today face many problems in their everyday life What are these problems Should governments encourage people to move to smaller regional towns 89
- The only way to improve road safety is to give much stricter punishments on driving offenses To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 614, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'have'.
Suggestion: have
...h virtual content people are exposed to has not gone through any trustworthy examin...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2067.0 1615.20841683 128% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 6.11538461538 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11379393749 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.668639053254 0.561755894193 119% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.2947067309 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.0 106.682146367 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 20.7667163134 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 7.06120827912 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.139284985654 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412731770381 0.084324248473 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.038402483254 0.0667982634062 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0820775005974 0.151304729494 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0473953165808 0.056905535591 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.4 13.0946893788 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 19.71 50.2224549098 39% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.3001002004 150% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.51 12.4159519038 149% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.33 8.58950901804 132% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 78.4519038076 175% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 614, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'have'.
Suggestion: have
...h virtual content people are exposed to has not gone through any trustworthy examin...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2067.0 1615.20841683 128% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 6.11538461538 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11379393749 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.668639053254 0.561755894193 119% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.2947067309 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.0 106.682146367 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 20.7667163134 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 7.06120827912 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.139284985654 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412731770381 0.084324248473 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.038402483254 0.0667982634062 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0820775005974 0.151304729494 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0473953165808 0.056905535591 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.4 13.0946893788 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 19.71 50.2224549098 39% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.3001002004 150% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.51 12.4159519038 149% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.33 8.58950901804 132% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 78.4519038076 175% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => 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.