Maintaining public libraries is a waste of time since computer technology is now replacing their functions. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
With the unprecedented digital transformation, computers are becoming a common way for people to access information. Some people believe that public libraries are no longer necessary to maintain. I agree that some traditional functions of public libraries have been replaced by technologies; however, in many modern cities, public libraries are transforming into an essential educational centre for communities.
Since the development of computer technologies, online resources have provided people with many conveniences in terms of time efficiency and geographic flexibility. Instead of physically borrowing books from libraries, citizens can easily browse online and download the digital copy, accessing the information at any time in their convenience. In addition, owing to computer science, digital materials can be accessible across various regions, which minimises the geographic limitation compared with the traditional libraries. For these reasons, fewer people go to libraries to borrow books or look up information.
However, in recent years, an increasing number of modern public libraries are undergoing the revolution to become a major hub for people to access community resources and to collaborate with other citizens. For example, in Melbourne, local councils and governments offer job seeking and language training seminars through public libraries to help new arrivals of Australians to better settle down. Furthermore, some libraries support residents’ socialization through effective events such as photographing workshop or book sharing session, enhancing people’s sense of well-being. Therefore, more and more people actively attend these activities in public libraries.
In conclusion, this essay argued that although the traditional borrowing function of public libraries is gradually replaced by the internet, investing public libraries is still vital because of its revolutionary educational function.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-11 | maiphuong0610 | 84 | view |
| 2021-10-11 | maiphuong0610 | 89 | view |
| 2021-07-10 | nhile1001 | 92 | view |
| 2020-07-13 | solaz1 | 73 | view |
| 2019-08-10 | mandy.zang | 82 | view |
- Some people think reading stories in books is better than watching TV or playing computer games for children. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- Some people think that using mobile phones and computers has a negative effect on young people s reading and writing skills To what extent do you agree or disagree 81
- Students in school or university learn more from teachers than from other resources (e.g. Internet or TV), do you agree or disagree? 61
- Maintaining public libraries is a waste of time since computer technology is now replacing their functions To what extent do you agree or disagree 82
- many countries believe that international tourism has harmful effects. Why do they think so? What can be done to change their views? 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 163, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...people believe that public libraries are no longer necessary to maintain. I agree...
^^
Line 7, column 235, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...its revolutionary educational function.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, look, so, still, therefore, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1680.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 271.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.19926199262 5.12529762239 121% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24526105873 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630996309963 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.1240507507 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.0 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5833333333 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06120827912 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18458063327 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693473821327 0.084324248473 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0449421268003 0.0667982634062 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119285437993 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0398098236585 0.056905535591 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 13.0946893788 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 50.2224549098 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.98 12.4159519038 153% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.5 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.