Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
Curently, there are an increasing number of people who are concerned about the fact that Hi-Tech can replace public libraries because of the wasting of money. However, wheher it is an debatable issue. My view is that I do not agree with that idea. Reasons are as follows
First, it is obvious that books which contained in libraries were selected carefully to avoid the deviation of knowledges. This means that, unlike the wide range of information on the internet which makes individuals feel confused when developing their knowledge. So, libraries are critical to the public, especially the pupils who need to inprove their understanding.
Moreover, libraries included a large amount of rare books that people cannot find on the internet. For example, there is a famous biological book named Campbell. It is very necessary for people who want to know more about ecosystem, however, this book is not available free on the internet, individuals must pay an amount of money to have it's PDF file. Whereas in contrast, it can be found easily in libraries and you can borrow it whenever you want.
It is not say that computer technology is useless on providing information. It can not only fast but also contains a huge amount of information related to the topic that people want to find. But due to a wide information resources, people can receive the wrong information and it can be harmful for the public.
In conclusion, I disagree with the idea technology can replace libraries although the money consuming while we can use money to rebuilt the public libraries to impress and encourage people to go to libraries instead of staying at home.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-04 | iceber9 | 82 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | nagakhoa | 89 | view |
| 2019-08-07 | KatherineLQ | 73 | view |
| 2019-06-08 | hin07 | 84 | view |
| 2019-05-18 | Hau Nguyen | 84 | view |
- Some people think that it is more beneficial to take part in sports which are play in teams, like football, while other people think that taking part in individuals sports, like tennis or swimming, is better. Discuss both view and give your opinion. 56
- Research shows that business meetings, discussions and training are happening online nowadays. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? 11
- Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree? 61
- The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010 73
- The table below shows the number of visitors to Ashdow Museum during the year before and the year after it was refurbished. The charts show the result of survey asking visitors how satisfied they were with their visit, during the same two periods. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 182, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...wasting of money. However, wheher it is an debatable issue. My view is that I do n...
^^
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e with that idea. Reasons are as follows First, it is obvious that books which co...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, moreover, so, whereas, while, for example, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1371.0 1615.20841683 85% => OK
No of words: 277.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94945848375 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74284140638 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.563176895307 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7133178386 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.9285714286 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7857142857 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.85714285714 7.06120827912 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.320887637767 0.244688304435 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.095264614003 0.084324248473 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0862794372238 0.0667982634062 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171250411705 0.151304729494 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0757164045372 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.4159519038 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.