Recently, the phenomenon of "universities should only procure digital materials rather than constantly textbooks" and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of adopting new technology is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals.
From an educational point of view, digitalization brings knowledge available in any part of the world. Even noticeably today, libraries are transforming themselves into an online platform so that students can get access to academic journals. Further, ever since the introduction of mobile phones and laptops, university-going youth prefers to read, bookmark, or copy material directly from the digital content. Apart from this, paper is made from trees, and with the introduction of Laptop, deforestation would be reduced as need of paper will be limited contributing sustainability to the ecosystem of the earth. For a tangible example, according to a survey done by Stanford University asserted that 9 out 10 students in universities find textbooks boring due to lack of creativity whereas in laptops, insights of creativity reflect. Hence, the beneficial ramifications of both electronic journals and reduction in cutting down of trees apparently can be seen.
On the other hand, some people find it difficult to focus on digital journals, and they prefer traditional textbooks where they can highlight points with markers. Consequently, demand of textbooks exists, and universities are forced to bring variety of hard books for students. Moreover, devices which enable digitalization are cost-effective, and therefore universities find it difficult to invest in digitalization.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that more electronic devices should be made available in universities.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, moreover, so, therefore, whereas, while, apart from, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 5.94088669951 101% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 20.9802955665 57% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 31.9359605911 144% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1650.0 1207.87684729 137% => OK
No of words: 283.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83038869258 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.43589384727 2.71678728327 126% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 139.433497537 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.671378091873 0.580463131201 116% => OK
syllable_count: 518.4 379.143842365 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.6157635468 22% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 0.931034482759 644% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.1934139988 50.4703680194 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.5 104.977214359 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5833333333 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.33333333333 7.25397266985 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251360101934 0.242375264174 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0790700859388 0.0925447433944 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0463940090985 0.071462118173 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131680409538 0.151781067708 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0365981800839 0.0609392437508 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 12.6369458128 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.83 11.5310837438 146% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.64 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 55.0591133005 191% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.94827586207 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.