The use of mobile phones should be banned in public places like libraries and shops. To what extent do you agree or disagree
Hitherto, globalization has led to the interference of public areas, and the question of whether compact devices such as mobile phones must be forbidden in shops and libraries or not has been appealing public concentration. While a huge group of people laments that it is necessary to deter public space-goers from using phones, I completely lean forward the latter one by giving some rational evidence.
It is conspicuous that library visitors or shop goers must have their phones by side to adapt to their daily demands. Almost all people who frequent these places are mostly young adolescence, so they must have their phones by side to look up information, or even materials for their researches. There are some details that are not clarified in the book; therefore, some students must use another digital source of knowledge and that will heighten their performance. Furthermore, going to the library does not mean that they have to spend all their time reading books, library-goers can use their portable and compact devices at home to search for digital books, but they love the no-noise atmosphere in the library, that is why they reach there. There was a survey on TV that discussing about the rate of students who actually go to the library to read books and the surprising result that there were over 68 percentages of all attendances waste half of their time surfing social media while staying in the library.
On the other hand, many residents agree that phones or any high-tech devices used in the library or shops can make other customers lose the thread; however, this credo is completely wrong. Due to the high intellectual, seldom do the young go to public zones without an earphone or headphones, so they can use these devices to steep in their personal world, listening to music and reading books. Further and more important, though, in emergency cases, mobile phones are the unique item for people to contact with their family members or the local authorities, so they must be allowed to use in any vicinities.
By way of conclusion, phones are the most critical item which should not be forbidden in public places.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-02 | nguyenkhang | 70 | view |
| 2021-10-20 | buiminhduc | 56 | view |
| 2021-09-08 | KEVA | 84 | view |
| 2021-09-07 | KEVA | 84 | view |
| 2021-09-07 | tamle | 78 | view |
- in their advertising businesses nowadays usually emphasize that their products are new in some ways Why is this Do you think this is a positive or negative development 89
- Online shopping is increasing dramatically How could this trend affect our environment and the kinds of jobs required 78
- in their advertising businesses nowadays usually emphasize that their products are new in some ways Why is this Do you think this is a positive or negative development 87
- The table shows information about department stores and online stores in Australia in 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 11
- Some countries allow old people to work to any age that they want Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 74, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...o the interference of public areas, and the question of whether compact devices such as mobile phones m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, furthermore, however, if, look, so, therefore, while, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 24.0651302605 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1779.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 360.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94166666667 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6525538009 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561111111111 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 557.1 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 32.0 20.2975951904 158% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.8133969083 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 161.727272727 106.682146367 152% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.7272727273 20.7667163134 158% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.63636363636 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.220630884784 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0917872165664 0.084324248473 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571686353484 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154795988923 0.151304729494 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.04074248732 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 13.0946893788 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.46 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.1190380762 146% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.