These days, it has become a growing trend to see Library offering students ample opportunity to augment their knowledge in numerous fields from arts and science to trade and commerce by providing hi-tech media gadgets. In this essay, I shall elaborate both aspects, including positive and negative, of accessing information and knowledge in the library using digital gadgets.
At the outset, there are myriad of benefits which can be attributed to the involvement of the digital devices in the setting of the library. Firstly, the most conspicuous one is that the way people now read books and attain knowledge is no longer the same as was even a decade or two earlier, prior to the advent of hi-tech media. Not only can libraries store hundreds of e-books in a single device like e-book readers and tablet devices, but they can also retrieve these books later and read them more conveniently without worrying about storing in large space. Therefore, needless to say, the library stands in a preponderant position, as far as broadening individual's horizons using the state-of-the-art technologies is concerned.
However, another pivotal facet of the argument is that all of the library users are not tech savvy, and it is hard for them to find the information they have been looking. For instance, according to the census data, about 70 percent of library users are either children or older adults. It should also be mentioned that the technology also allows copying the books to other devices, thus leading to piracy and copyright concerns. Hence, it hardly needs to mention that the technological advancement sometimes harms intense of potential readers which have a far-reaching impact on the people.
To recapitulate from the arguments aforementioned, one can conclude that despite having some pitfalls, the advantages of using digital gadgets in collecting information from the library are indeed too great to ignore.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 56, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...r pivotal facet of the argument is that all of the library users are not tech savvy, and i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, look, so, therefore, thus, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.5418719212 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 8.36945812808 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 5.94088669951 118% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 31.9359605911 138% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.75862068966 191% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1207.87684729 134% => OK
No of words: 310.0 242.827586207 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23870967742 5.00649968141 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 3.92707691288 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83775643819 2.71678728327 104% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 139.433497537 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.61935483871 0.580463131201 107% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 379.143842365 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.65517241379 192% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.5024630542 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 35.1033892079 50.4703680194 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 147.636363636 104.977214359 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1818181818 20.9669160288 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.45454545455 7.25397266985 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => 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: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176656549329 0.242375264174 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0633970755621 0.0925447433944 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0565243249073 0.071462118173 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112957635103 0.151781067708 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0484274636802 0.0609392437508 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 12.6369458128 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 53.1260098522 65% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 11.5310837438 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.17 8.32886699507 122% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 55.0591133005 183% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.94827586207 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.3980295567 127% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.5123152709 133% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.