The main purpose of a public library is to provide books, and they shouldn’t waste the limited resources and space on providing expensive hi-tech media such as computer software, video, and DVDs.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Libraries are great resources for people to seek knowledge and information. Thanks to the improvement of technology that public libraries are applying hi-tech media in order to serve customers. However, some people disagree with the use of computers and videos due to expensive costs. In my opinion, I strongly believe that the use of technology in libraries should continue because of numerous benefits.
It may be true to some extent that a great amount of money should be allocated to equip libraries with hi-tech media. However, the advantages that it brings along with are significantly undeniable. Firstly, computers, hardware and software are great storages of books and information. Only with a small disc can librarians store thousands of books, articles, magazines and the like. Moreover, the resources also last long, even a hundred years just by copying or duplicating. On the contrary, books can just be kept for a short period and they consume lots of places as well. Secondly, by using technology in managing that librarians can easily access the system. It is extremely useful since it can also link with other public library systems worldwide.
In terms of library-goers, applying hi-tech media in libraries can help people feel more interesting; therefore, their appetite for reading books will generally increase. DVDs and videos provide a lively atmosphere with sound and images. Additionally, it also assists in the process of knowledge acquisition. In addition, software for studying foreign languages attract a great number of citizens, especially children. Not only by reading books but also by interacting with games, songs and videos can children reinforce their lessons acquired from schools.
From all the above-mentioned, libraries should increase the use of hi-tech appliances in both managing and serving public people. Authorities should allocate a suitable amount of money on updating and renovating old-fashioned public libraries.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in addition, in my opinion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1673.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 303.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52145214521 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9526317379 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57095709571 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.1706640133 49.4020404114 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 88.0526315789 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9473684211 20.7667163134 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21052631579 7.06120827912 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208223702689 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620563042229 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0558462824143 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126349158613 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346722237554 0.056905535591 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.0946893788 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 50.2224549098 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.44 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.