Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
In recent days, collecting information has become more convenient thanks to the proliferation of technology. Although this method is practical in many aspects, preserving public libraries should be paid much more attention.
On the one hand, there are a number of benefits/ advantages of finding information by using the Internet. Firstly, this method is really convenient as (dùng as thay because thì formal hơn, còn ở đầu câu thì dùng since) search engine allows us to search any material online quickly only with a click of mouse or even a screen touch of smart phones, at any time and any where. Before the appearance of the Internet, people are required to travel physically to libraries to find such materials, which costs unnecessary time and effort. Secondly, the Internet provides us a huge amount of data from different sources so students/people can choose suitable material for their projects or assignments. It is obvious that these online materials are easier to study rather than collecting several books in a library.
On the other hand, public libraries still have more advantages than the Internet. One benefit is that libraries can create a professional studying place with sufficient facilities and quiet atmosphere, which are beneficial to students as they can concentrate on their academic purposes. Additionally, individuals have chance to make friends and exchange learning experience while studying in this place. Furthermore, the library plays an important role in providing reliable learning resource. In fact, the materials have been strictly verified by authorities before being published, while it is impossible to do the same progress for all of the information on the Internet. That is why books in libraries are more reliable than online documents.
In conclusion, although the development of computer science has brought lots of benefits to our lives, I believe that not all functions of a public library can be performed by it. Therefore, maintaining public libraries still worth receiving national budget.
| 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 |
- The graph shows the income of four cafes in New York over the last year Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant 66
- The line graph below shows changes in the amount and type of fast food consumed by Australian teenagers from 1975 to 2000. 84
- It is impossible to help all people in the world, so governments should only focus on people in their own countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- The table illustrates the number of people going to different tourist attractions in Australia during the four-year period from 1996. 78
- These days, an increasing number of people in many cities know little about their neighbors and do not have a sense of community. What do you think are the causes and what solutions can you suggest? 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 363, Rule ID: ANY_WHERE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'anywhere'?
Suggestion: anywhere
... touch of smart phones, at any time and any where. Before the appearance of the Internet,...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 364, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to experience'
Suggestion: to experience
...e to make friends and exchange learning experience while studying in this place. Furthermo...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 637, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... impossible to do the same progress for all of the information on the Internet. That is wh...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, if, really, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, while, in conclusion, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1742.0 1615.20841683 108% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42679127726 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9533597526 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607476635514 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 536.4 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2060383171 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.133333333 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.6 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More 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: 0.158134329296 0.244688304435 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518229692602 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0472954404386 0.0667982634062 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101560060906 0.151304729494 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570172387908 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 78.4519038076 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.