While many museums sell tickets in order to generate revenue, others offer their collections to public free of charge. In my opinion, although these institutions can benefit from money they acquire through ticket sales, the public interest is served considerably better if admission is free.
Firstly, I will briefly consider the purpose museums have in a society. These institutions exhibit works of art, as well as various historical artefacts. Thus, they act as the guardians of the cultural heritage of a society. Depriving people of their history and culture can be detrimental to their understanding of the world they live in. However, costly tickets can deter many less-affluent people from visiting museums.
Nevertheless, museums would always welcome some extra funding. In the majority of countries, museums are publicly-funded, however selling reasonably-priced tickets is not prohibited. This additional money can be directed to different useful projects, like improving storage facilities or expanding existing collection. In addition, with extra funds, museums could participate in field explorations of historical sites, or purchase private collections, deemed to be of high public value.
However, exclusion is the biggest issue that occurs if the charging system is implemented. Besides making it more difficult for people to enrich themselves culturally, expensive tickets can create negative attitudes in public towards museums, and what they represent. If the common people start perceiving them as elitist hubs, not only that they will not frequent them, but they will also pass these negative stances to their children.
In conclusion, I believe that the large portion of the history and art belongs to a common cultural heritage, and therefore should be universally available and free. Private collections and exhibitions should exist to cater for needs of those audiences that have more sophisticated tastes, or are more intellectually inclined.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ns, deemed to be of high public value. However, exclusion is the biggest issue ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, briefly, but, first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1688.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7027027027 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04251437434 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621621621622 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5568659415 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.5 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.9375 7.06120827912 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.177273785651 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0514271280915 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0425081508599 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0878981730664 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038505681814 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.78 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.97 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => 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.