Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people. Why is it the case? What can be done to attract more local people to visit these places?
There is a controversial idea heating a debate over the fact that museums and places of historical significance are primarily attended by tourists rather than the locals. This essay is devoted to analyzing the roots with equivalent solutions to encourage the attendance of the locals to these places, followed by parallel justification.
Evidently, there are a number of factors why more forein visitors than the locals pay more visits to museums and history related places. The first and foremost culprits is that while visitors usually come from other countries, their curiosity and the demand to discover those mentioned places are undeniably much higher. It is true that foreigners will more excitedly discover other nations' cultural heritages and war relics as well as gain insights to the destination country. Conversely, the local citizens are usually well-acquainted with the past of their cities. Moreover, due to the prohibitivly exorbitant price range in the entrance fee of many well-known historical sites, it is more affordable for visitors from other nations than some less rich locales in developing ones.
Regarding the solutions of enhancing the interest of the local people in coming to museums and important historical sites, there are a wealth of courses that are available. One approach is to arouse the curiosity amongst the native people by organizing varied activities which may incorporate art performances or using virtual reality. This may not only help them feel the need to learn historical lessons but also cultivate their sense of patriotism and belonging. In addition, the authorities should reduce the entrance fee or offer some discount to local inhabitants. Consequently, they will have a chance to take place in those sites and museums.
In conclusion, while it is understandable that foreigners often show greater enthusiasm for museums and history spots, proper actions can be adopted to awaken the interest of local residents in those mentioned places.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 785, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e less rich locales in developing ones. Regarding the solutions of enhancing the...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, first, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, thus, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, of course, as well as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 312.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42307692308 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91072937533 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586538461538 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 545.4 506.74238477 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6495665107 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.153846154 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.1538461538 7.06120827912 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.287449274747 0.244688304435 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0855735968889 0.084324248473 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0590511072302 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144256880057 0.151304729494 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0255331790091 0.056905535591 45% => 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: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.