Should library use digital gadgets to provide information on different topics? Pros & Cons
Recently, using digital gadgets in libraries has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question "what are the Pros and Cons of using digital gadgets for providing information on different topics in libraries?". Whereas it is a widely held view that it is not beneficial, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the technology standpoint, digital equipment is bound up inextricably with internet connection, which indicates it leads to both smart phone and tablet. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2018 demonstrates the relationship between electronic sources and E-book as well as an exponential increase in computer users. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of easy access is correlated positively with not only online articles but also electronic reader devices.
Within the realm of economy, without the slightest doubt, unprinted books attribute to less paper, in that it would come down to online sharing, general topics, and world access. A salient example of such attribution is purchasable books, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take public library for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint deforestation and air pollution problems. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of digital format and internet invention.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes "all's well that ends well," after analyzing what elaborated above, I firmly believe that the advantages of digital gadgets are outweigh its disadvantages. However, with the benefit of hindsight, we conceive the more we research, the further we discover.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-29 | yasamin.gharib62 | 85 | view |
| 2019-10-18 | marsh | 80 | view |
| 2019-05-18 | Pavitra Kumari | 77 | view |
| 2019-05-08 | zjaved | 80 | view |
| 2019-03-16 | neelu sharma | 80 | view |
- Does video communication with doctor help patients to cure any disease? Pros & Cons? 77
- Successful sports stars and glamorous film stars are a role model for youngsters. Do you support it or not? (Agree/Disagree). 88
- It is important to preserve the beautiful buildings of the past, even if it will be expensive to do so. To what extent do you agree or disagree with it. 77
- Communication has changed significantly in the last 10 years. Discuss the positive and negative impacts of this change 88
- building more roads to allow more vehicle owner to improve the networks of public transport? agree or disagree? 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cts of that throughout this essay. From the technology standpoint, digital ...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ut also electronic reader devices. Within the realm of economy, without the...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tal format and internet invention. To conclude, as for myself, as the sayin...
^^^^^^^
Line 25, column 78, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...ying goes 'alls well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Line 25, column 185, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'outweighed'.
Suggestion: outweighed
...t the advantages of digital gadgets are outweigh its disadvantages. However, with the be...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 20.9802955665 105% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1606.0 1207.87684729 133% => OK
No of words: 282.0 242.827586207 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69503546099 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14158780955 2.71678728327 116% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 139.433497537 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.684397163121 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 379.143842365 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.65517241379 192% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0676985888 50.4703680194 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.833333333 104.977214359 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.25397266985 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.33497536946 94% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213337576431 0.242375264174 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.057607039532 0.0925447433944 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13866856316 0.071462118173 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131673778395 0.151781067708 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.170402388411 0.0609392437508 280% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 12.6369458128 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.1260098522 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.9458128079 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.08 11.5310837438 139% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.82 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 55.0591133005 196% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.94827586207 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.