Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
Much attention has been drawn to whether financial funding should be spent on library maintenance for the public due to the fact that function of library is substituted by high-tech devices. This essay, however, believes that maintaining public libraries is a rational course of action. Not only is library membership more affordable than owning a piece of technological equipment for some people, but some individuals opt for the quiet and academic atmosphere of libraries.
In terms of benefits, libraries offer low-cost option for the community. Firstly, if a person only pays five dollars for the registration fee instead of five hundred dollars for a typical smartphone as well as laptop, he can save his money. For instance, when college students start a semester, using the campus library can eliminate the need for new books, let alone some expensive items such as iPad. Financial burden, subsequently, is lifted to a certain extent, which gives the students more pocket money for personal expenditure. On top of that, a library does not cost too much since there are charitable donation, government funding along with educational grant which contribute to the maintenance fee.
As far as facilities concerned, libraries provide a place that enables intense concentration. It is undeniable that the public policy of libraries requires attendants to keep silent during their stay and everyone who goes to the library oftentimes comply with this rule. Consider a university student who is doing research for his graduate dissertation. He will be able to find all of the materials he needs while being able to focus due to the silent background at library. This will lead to increased productivity together with alertness. Although some people say libraries are outdated nowadays, this simply is not the case as there are a good deal of computers available.
In conclusion, even though technology is developing as an significant rate, public libraries will not be abolish for the foreseeable future.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-04 | iceber9 | 82 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | nagakhoa | 89 | view |
| 2019-08-07 | KatherineLQ | 73 | view |
| 2019-06-08 | hin07 | 84 | view |
| 2019-05-18 | Hau Nguyen | 84 | view |
- There is no need to go out to see live performance concert because it is better to see them on the TV or Computer screen Do you agree or disagree 73
- Some people feel that manufacturers and supermarkets have the responsibility to reduce the amount of packaging of goods. Others argue that customers should avoid buying goods with a lot of packaging. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 84
- Today different types of robots are developed which are good friends to us and help us both at home and work Is this a positive or negative development 94
- There is no need to go out to see social cinema because it is better to see them on the TV or computer screen Do you agree or disagree 84
- The supplied diagram enumerates the amount of financial investment in research by the U S government from 1980 to 2008
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 379, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...e dissertation. He will be able to find all of the materials he needs while being able to ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 648, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'deals'?
Suggestion: deals
...ply is not the case as there are a good deal of computers available. In conclus...
^^^^
Line 13, column 56, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...even though technology is developing as an significant rate, public libraries will...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, so, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as well as, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1700.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 320.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3125 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92883695987 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.628125 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.5080179671 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.333333333 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06120827912 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182584268138 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0599632410163 0.084324248473 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0377334189602 0.0667982634062 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110539873237 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0153515851595 0.056905535591 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.