Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology can replace their functions. Do you agree or disagree?
Opinions are widely divergent on the role of libraries in this contemporary era. Many individuals are of the belief that public libraries are no longer of great importance due to the unprecedented growth of computer technology; thus, maintaining them turns out to be a total waste of resources. From my perspective, I find myself in total disagreement with this aforementioned notion.
On the one hand, proponents of the abolition of libraries espouse that computers could carry out all the required tasks in a much more effective way than libraries. First and foremost, since computers are programmed with a set of algorithms, they are able to ensure a more streamlined process. For example, with regard to such tasks as sorting out the data of users or books which contain an element of precision, while humans may susceptible to mistakes and errors during this process probably resulting from fatigue, hardly will computers encounter such circumstances. Additionally, granted that computers possess a high storage capacity, it is by no means a challenge for them to convert all the data into their memory; thus, enabling people to gain access to a treasure trove of materials to assist their work and study with just a click of a mouse.
On the other hand, it is my firm belief that libraries have a pivotal role to play in society. First of all, libraries can grant people a golden opportunity to widen their social circle. With the help of libraries, bookworms could gather and share their interests with one another, resulting in cultivating a sense of belonging. For instance, Phu Yen library has a long-standing practice of holding reading events annually, which is indubitably a once-in-a-lifetime experience for book addicts within the area. Another justification for my opinion is that libraries could act as means to create employment opportunities for citizens. Indeed, working as librarians could generate a decent income for inhabitants, enhancing their standard of living. If it weren't for libraries, a great number of people would be vulnerable to unemployment status.
To recapitulate, although computer technology could facilitate the reading process owing to its higher efficacy, never can it stand a chance of completely replacing libraries in this regard. Considering the advantages pertaining to relationships and employment, the library deserves to receive funding for its maintenance.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-27 | linh đan | 67 | view |
| 2023-08-27 | Afdalah Harris | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-31 | Nguyên-MTTN | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-31 | Nguyên-MTTN | 73 | view |
| 2023-02-24 | grahamoneil | 61 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 755, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...hancing their standard of living. If it werent for libraries, a great number of people...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, so, thus, while, for example, for instance, first of all, with regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 41.998997996 150% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2042.0 1615.20841683 126% => OK
No of words: 381.0 315.596192385 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35958005249 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15753158619 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590551181102 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 644.4 506.74238477 127% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.8738320597 49.4020404114 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.625 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8125 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6875 7.06120827912 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181566910581 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0567699157279 0.084324248473 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0470849132292 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112673730331 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0226391211545 0.056905535591 40% => 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: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.96 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 78.4519038076 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.