Many museums charge for admission while others are free
.
Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages?
Towards the issue of whether museums should charge for entrance fee, people often develop different viewpoints. While there are good arguments in favour of letting visitors enter museums for free, I find myself more inclined to the idea that museums should collect entrance fee.
Firstly, there are good reasons why a sizeable number of people believe that entrance fee brings more harm than good to museums. As visitors are charged for admission to enter museums, the number of visitors will significantly decrease. As a result, entrance fee discourages people to visit museums to acquire useful knowledge and skill. From museum's perspective, it fails to achieve one of its objectives to educate people. Moreover, museums often receive funding from the government to operate. As selling tickets bring in money, museums may no longer receive this government funding.
Despite aforementioned disadvantageous, I am convinced that the entrance fee brings about a myriad of advantageous to museums. First, the amount of money collected from entrance fee will assist museums in acquiring exhibits. The updates of exhibits will attract visitors to return to the museums. Secondly, museums can have money to invest in operational activities including buying new equipment or cleaning services. Having visited many museums myself, I have learnt that museums which charge for admission are better than those that do not sell tickets in term of equipment and clean atmosphere.
In summary, although it is undeniable that entrance ticket potentially results in the decrease in number of visitors, I am of the opinion that museums should apply entrance fee to operate more effectively
Your essay is constructed nicely for an argumentative one. Let's look at a couple of possible revisions to enhance it.
I suggest revising your first line. If you reread it, there's an unnatural tone to it. It would be better if you had switched the structure - do the subject first before you introduce your predicate. This will make the writing more organic.
If I were you, I would phrase it like this:
People have varying viewpoints when speaking of whether it is appropriate or not for museums to charge an entrance fee.
To get better at this skill, I highly recommend reading your essay out loud. This will make you grasp if a text would roll off your tongue smoothly - or would merely be dragging. If it's the latter, consider revising.
Proceeding to your second paragraph, the third line can come off as off-putting. What specific skill and knowledge are you referring to that people would "acquire" from visiting? Delving into specifics can help. Perhaps you can tackle cultural intelligence acquisition from visiting these areas.
You may also add more details to your summation. Talk a bit more about the comparatives.
Here are some slightly revised sentences I would suggest, using asterisks to indicate specific words changed:
In the first line of your first paragraph, "should charge entrance fees* ".
Later in the second paragraph, "entrance fees* discourage* people from* visiting* museums to ... and skills*. From the* museum's perspective" .
At the end of the second paragraph, "as selling tickets brings* money in" .
At the beginning of the third paragraph, "Despite the* aforementioned disadvantages*, I am ... fees* bring* about a myriad of advantages* to museums. First, ... entrance fees* will assist ..."
In the last paragraph, "In ... undeniable that charging* for* entrance tickets* potentially results in a* decrease in the* number of visitors, ... apply entrance fees* to ..."
Hope that helps a bit.