Many museums charge for admission while others are free.
Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages?
It is undeniable that museums are considered as holy ground for learning about culture, history and evolution of a nation. Nowadays, soe museums have started taking entrance fee from its visitors. While the action can be quite beneficial to the museums and the economy in special circumstances, I consider that it may have harmful effect on the community.
Firstly, a country can generate a huge some of money by taking admission fee. Museums are one of the main attarctions of tourists. Tourists, especially historians, flock around museums to understand the total nature of a state. As a result of charging them for the time and service, the museums will earn a great deal of money. Moreover, security can be enforced more strictly by charging admission fee to the guests. In addition to that, employment opportunity might be generated as the museum will need to hire book keepers, door guards and so on. Furthermore, outsiders can be easily managed in case of an emergency.
On the contrary, taking money from the visitors might have the opposite effect as well. It can be noticed by several analysts that the museums that charge their sight-seers, have far less people coming to them than the ones which are free. Many famous museums offer free admission, specially to the young visitors (under the age of 18) to encourage them to become more interested in their own history and culture.
To conclude, although charging admission can be advantegeous for the museum in many ways, there can be some detrimental effect on the society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 184, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...that charge their sight-seers, have far less people coming to them than the ones whi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, may, moreover, so, well, while, in addition, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1286.0 1615.20841683 80% => OK
No of words: 257.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00389105058 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74076389056 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 176.041082164 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.579766536965 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 506.74238477 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.9237429303 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.8571428571 106.682146367 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3571428571 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.287958298462 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0981148646891 0.084324248473 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0672251248266 0.0667982634062 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185810074341 0.151304729494 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0432809016669 0.056905535591 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 78.4519038076 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.