Some people believe that the museums and historic sites should be open for free for children under 18 years old. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is argued that the entry fee for students who are under 18 should be levied for the

visit

to historical sites and

museums

. I agree with

this

statement because high fees will exclude many

children

to

visit

these

places

and students will get a chance to explore

places

they study in books.

To begin

with,

museums

often have high fees to

visit

. Most parents cannot afford to pay for these visits on top of their household and

school

expenses.

Thus

,

children

, whose parents do not have enough money, are excluded from the visitors’ lists resulting in many not able to see the sculptures made by their country’s legends.

For example

, in Singapore, the state sponsor all

school

children

to

visit

such

places

so that they can get a chance to see artefacts build by the prominent sculptors of the nation.

However

, others might say that

this

would put an extra burden on the government’s financial resources.

Besides

, students in the

school

are taught about the heritage sites which were important in the past.

Therefore

, for a better understanding of the historical significance of a particular place, visiting that place would put up a strong impression on the mind and can be remembered for a long time.

For instance

, a study by Cambridge University found that the people who went on excursion trips during

school

time are 70% more likely to remember the history of a place than the people who did not n conclusion,

this

essay agrees that trips to

museums

and historical sites should be free for

children

who are below 18 because

museums

entry fees are quite high which cannot be paid by many and

children

can learn better when they

visit

historical

places

as a person