Museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people. Why is this the case? What can be done to attract local people to visit these places?
Most of the historical places such as forts, monuments and museums are a point of attraction for the tourists. It is a common observation that natives / native people do not visit these places. One major reason for this is that visiting such places repeatedly is monotonous.
Plus, the local public do not wish to spend money on entry tickets to visit the same place again and again. However, it is possible to attract local residents to these sites by taking certain measures. This essay will discuss the mentioned causes and the solutions to attract locals to these places.
One important reason for the local public to not visit the local historical places is that they have nothing new to offer. Many prefer to visit multiplexes and amusement parks which are loaded with new attractions. Hence, museums and art galleries which have the same exhibits on display cannot pull the local crowd. Another important reason is the entry fees. Entry fees at museums and historical places can hinder a local tourist from visiting them. No one is interested in paying for entry to see the same artefacts on display again and again. For example, a fort built by King Bhosle at Nagpur has very few local visitors owing to the hefty entry fees.
However, by taking few actions this issue can be taken care of. Adding new attractions to museums and forts can gain the attention of native visitors. Historical places will be able to pull more local crowd if they have additional activities to offer. For example, forts in Rajasthan organise cultural programmes by folk artists who rotate on weekly basis. Such rotation amongst different folk artists for performances can keep a place lively and enjoyable. In addition, waving off the entry fee for the local residents can boost the number of local visitors. To illustrate, the Raman Science Centre at Nagpur is gathering a considerable number of native visitors since it waived off the entry fee for the locals.
In conclusion, the monotony of local historical places can be changed by reviving them with new attractions. Also, entry fee waiver is an important step to push native people to visit local places frequently.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-26 | harmankaur | 91 | view |
| 2019-06-26 | harmankaur | 61 | view |
| 2019-06-09 | sana23 | 73 | view |
- Write a letter to your friend to recommend a book to read that you have read You should include Describe the book How it can help him her Where can he get it from 85
- Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology In what ways has technology affected personal relationships Has this become a positive or negative development 54
- It is often thought that the increase in juvenile crime can be attributed to violence in the media. What do you think is the reason for a growth in the rate of juvenile crime? What solutions can you offer to deal with this situation? 73
- Completing university education is thought by some to be the best way to get a good job. On the other hand, other people think that getting experience and developing soft skills is more important.Discuss both sides and give your opinion? 91
- Completing university education is thought by some to be the best way to get a good job. On the other hand, other people think that getting experience and developing soft skills is more important. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.Give reasons for 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 674, Rule ID: WAIVED_OFF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'waved off'?
Suggestion: waved off
...able number of native visitors since it waived off the entry fee for the locals. In con...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, so, as for, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 364.0 315.596192385 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96153846154 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36792674256 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51768747754 2.80592935109 90% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491758241758 0.561755894193 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 571.5 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 16.0721442886 137% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 20.4661078432 49.4020404114 41% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 82.0909090909 106.682146367 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5454545455 20.7667163134 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.90909090909 7.06120827912 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.389630688249 0.244688304435 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123788756716 0.084324248473 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0855983695744 0.0667982634062 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.248090573477 0.151304729494 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0389627923807 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 13.0946893788 78% => 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: 11.19 12.4159519038 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.