Should library use digital gadgets to provide information on different topics? pros and cons.
Technology has undergone a colossal of changes in the last few decades. This upsurge in innovations of gadgets has caused a debate in the field of education. Some people opine that libraries should use new technical devices to provide information to readers. This trend has many merits and demerits with it. This essay will elaborate on the viewpoints and lead to a reasoned conclusion.
There is a myriad of advantages to including electronic devices in the library. The most preponderant one is that they are quite convenient and easy to use. Moreover, the information provided with the help of audio and visual can help to understand it more precisely. For example, many libraries provide computers to gain information which is less time consuming and can be easily accessed. Therefore, the advantages provided by these devices are too dire to be ignored.
On the other hand, this vogue also has some pitfalls. The most conspicuous one is that there many people who are not much used to electronic gadgets. Not only it will become difficult for them to use it but also decrease the importance of the library. For instance, according to a survey majority of the population who uses the library is of children and old people, who are not familiar with the usage of these devices. Hence, reading books rather than using gadgets is more fruitful for our society.
In view of the arguments, it can be concluded that digital gadgets have both benefits and drawbacks, hence they should be used in conjunction with books in the library.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, moreover, so, therefore, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.5418719212 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1278.0 1207.87684729 106% => OK
No of words: 259.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93436293436 5.00649968141 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72878752587 2.71678728327 100% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 139.433497537 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548262548263 0.580463131201 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 420.3 379.143842365 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 1.71428571429 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 12.6551724138 126% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.5024630542 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.2659148942 50.4703680194 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.875 104.977214359 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1875 20.9669160288 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.6875 7.25397266985 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 2.91625615764 240% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244306941828 0.242375264174 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678398851995 0.0925447433944 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713022431207 0.071462118173 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143544411456 0.151781067708 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0176923785463 0.0609392437508 29% => 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: 9.9 12.6369458128 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.1260098522 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.54236453202 47% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.9458128079 87% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 11.5310837438 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.32886699507 104% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 55.0591133005 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.94827586207 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.3980295567 81% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.5123152709 95% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 69.4444444444 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 62.5 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.