Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people. Why this is the case and what can be done to attract more local people to visit these places?
It is argued that tourist pay more visits to museums and historical places than local residents. There are ample reasons for such a phenomenon and some measures should be imposed to develop the number of visitors from local areas.
There are two main justifications why museums and historical sites are preferred by tourists the local inhabitants. First and foremost, these aforementioned places are too similar to the local residents. It is possible that local residents have reached these places and have gained insights into local history and culture. Therefore, the knowledge provided by museums and historical sites could not trigger local people’s curiosity and they choose to travel abroad to access foreign traditional and cultural values instead. Moreover, the entrance fees for museums and archaeological places could be exorbitantly expensive for the local inhabitants especially those with economically disadvantaged to afford. Thus, residents might have less or no more interests in arrival in these places.
Government should adopt some action to address the aforementioned problems. First, authorities should launch advertisement campaigns on Television and social media to introduce the uniqueness of museums and historical sites to residents especially the youth. Hence, they could have more excitement in visiting archaeological places. For example, the Facebook page of Hoa Lo Prison Relic has interesting ways to share knowledge such as through mini-games , that arouses the attention of youngsters. In addition, the states should subsidize the entrance fees for local people. If there is not financial burdens, residents would pleasure to visit the museums and historical sites.
In conclusion, there are some rationales regarding to culture and money for the low number of local inhabitants visiting museums and historical sites. However, the authorities should take steps to mitigate such issues.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 454, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...are knowledge such as through mini-games , that arouses the attention of youngster...
^^
Line 7, column 220, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uld take steps to mitigate such issues.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, therefore, thus, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1645.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 287.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.73170731707 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97462057636 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.557491289199 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 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: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.3884615278 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.8125 106.682146367 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9375 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.362610958213 0.244688304435 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120418495414 0.084324248473 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0957019078556 0.0667982634062 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221102053572 0.151304729494 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0868937784796 0.056905535591 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.