Many museums charge for admission while others are free.
Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages?
There are controversial arguments regarding entrance fee for the museum. I believe that everyone possesses the right to appreciate artefacts.
While the reasons why people impose fees are plausible. The museums have the sense of responsibility for maintaining the precious works. If they get a few admission, visitors are able to enjoy them in a better environment. In addition, people tend to just pass without deep considering what the art saying. Once they pay the cost, the possibility that travellers see thoroughly is rise.
Overall, however, the free access has more benefits both individual and society. For a start, it is important that they are enjoyed by as many people as possible, and not only by those who can afford to visit them. Lower-income families can not easily accessible to there. Even if they don't have money enough, they are eligible to enjoy cultural life. Furthermore, when it comes to social impact, the general public can see works of art without going directly due to the development of the technology. As the result, the exhibition is likely to be closed. For example, when holidaymakers who live in far from Europe on a tight budget, the financial barriers might be pressure on them. So the number of people going to there is expected to decrease so that the economic damage can occur.
For the reasons mentioned above, I would argue that the drawbacks of charging people for admission to museums outweigh any benefits because we should not discourage the public from enjoying their collections, as well as the tourist industry, can be attacked.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 152, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun admission seems to be countable; consider using: 'few admissions'.
Suggestion: few admissions
...ining the precious works. If they get a few admission, visitors are able to enjoy them in a b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 287, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...asily accessible to there. Even if they dont have money enough, they are eligible to...
^^^^
Line 5, column 402, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...re, when it comes to social impact, the general public can see works of art without going dire...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, regarding, so, well, while, for example, in addition, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1325.0 1615.20841683 82% => OK
No of words: 262.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0572519084 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81012730204 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.62213740458 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.384769539078 520% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 7.0 2.10420841683 333% => Less 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: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.5378248791 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.8125 106.682146367 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.375 20.7667163134 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.625 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
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: 0.225791051957 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0586359204398 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0784109064958 0.0667982634062 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145011250515 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0753425422782 0.056905535591 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 13.0946893788 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 50.2224549098 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 78.4519038076 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.0 9.78957915832 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.