The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books and they shouldn’t waste their limited resources and space on providing expensive hi-tech media such as computer software, videos and DVDs. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
A school of thought, however, contends that libraries should focus on increasing the collection of the books because the library is meant and renowned to collect the books. This notion in my opinon is contentious as technology already changed the meaning to keeping, viewing any thing extensively. I will ponder upon the positive side of the topic with required arguments and examples.
There are myriads of arguments that why libraries should not just focused on physicals books. The preponderant one is that we are living in the technology era where plethora ways are available to access the information. Consequently, people do not have time to sit on the couch and read the physical books. For an instance, people love to read books while traveling and it is not possible for everyone to keep carry differnt kind of books with them all the time. As a result, if libraries can help them to provide e-books, so reader would get more choices to access the information whether on smartphone, laptop or any preferable mean of technology while keeping copyrights and legal constraint in mind.
Another pivotal aspect to support my point is that CDs, DVDs or computer software can provide better user experience, if anyone try to explore the information. For example, we human have tendency to illure towards differnt kind of things at a single point of time. However, if digital media helps to attract users with never ending experience, user feel more touched with the technology which enchaned the interest of the users.
In conclusion, as per above mentioned points and elucidation, one can conclude that with the expansion of technology, library should update with latest CDs and videos so that it allures the upcoming generation to learn new things in more systematic way.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 276, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'anything'?
Suggestion: anything
...changed the meaning to keeping, viewing any thing extensively. I will ponder upon the pos...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 129, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'anyone' must be used with a third-person verb: 'tries'.
Suggestion: tries
...ovide better user experience, if anyone try to explore the information. For example...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, however, if, so, while, for example, in conclusion, kind of, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.5418719212 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 20.9802955665 76% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 31.9359605911 128% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1491.0 1207.87684729 123% => OK
No of words: 294.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07142857143 5.00649968141 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72349595876 2.71678728327 100% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595238095238 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 379.143842365 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.65517241379 27% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2855906101 50.4703680194 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.25 104.977214359 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 20.9669160288 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.16666666667 7.25397266985 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12262189558 0.242375264174 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0404036122875 0.0925447433944 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0253605934062 0.071462118173 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0717597779154 0.151781067708 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00548251137584 0.0609392437508 9% => 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: 14.7 12.6369458128 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.1260098522 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.9458128079 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 11.5310837438 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.32886699507 113% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 55.0591133005 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 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.