It is true that some countries have free access to museums and historic sites for all people regardless the age. There are also countries that have no free access to any of the public sites at all. While I consider both facts as unnecessary extremes, I highly support the idea of fee waivers in such places for children under 18 to boost education level among the youngsters and to broaden their horizons regardless the level of wealth.
It is certainly important for all children to gain knowledge without any kind of impediments. While the adults have a financial position to pay for knowledge, the youth does not have the material means to exchange for education. Moreover, granting access for young generation to different sources of information, including museums and historic places, increases the general level of education among the students and the pupils. For instance, in the countries with free access to museums and historic ruins, the observed level of national education is much higher than the level of education in the countries that do not have it, according to the Global Education Survey.
Secondly, as young apprentices get more understanding of the world around them through easy access to museums and other cultural sites, they better apprehend the path to follow in their near future. On the contrary, in the countries with no free cultural objects for children a possibility to start a wrong career is much higher than in other countries. For example, in such states the governments spend more money to finance courses, which let people to gain skills other than were learned during the initial formal studies.
To conclude, allowing citizens under 18 to freely visit public repositories of cultural heritage does not only aid younger generation to enhance its level of theoretical knowledge, but also to choose right professions. It is beneficial on both the personal and the public levels.
It is true that
some
countries
have
free
access
to
museums
and historic sites for all
people
regardless the age. There are
also
countries
that have no
free
access
to any of the public sites at all. While I consider both facts as unnecessary extremes, I
highly
support the
idea
of fee waivers in such places for children under 18 to boost
education
level
among the youngsters and to broaden their horizons regardless the
level
of wealth.
It is
certainly
important
for all children to gain knowledge without any kind of impediments. While the adults have a financial position to pay for knowledge, the youth does not have the material means to exchange for
education
.
Moreover
, granting
access
for young generation to
different
sources of information, including
museums
and historic places, increases the general
level
of
education
among the students and the pupils.
For instance
, in the
countries
with
free
access
to
museums
and historic ruins, the observed
level
of national
education
is much higher than the
level
of
education
in the
countries
that do not have it, according to the Global
Education
Survey.
Secondly
, as young apprentices
get
more understanding of the world around them through easy
access
to
museums
and other cultural sites, they better apprehend the path to follow in their near future.
On the contrary
, in the
countries
with no
free
cultural objects for children a possibility to
start
a
wrong
career is much higher than in other
countries
.
For example
, in such states the
governments
spend more money to finance courses, which
let
people
to gain
skills
other than
were learned
during the initial formal studies.
To conclude
, allowing citizens under 18 to
freely
visit public repositories of cultural heritage does not
only
aid younger generation to enhance its
level
of theoretical knowledge,
but
also
to choose right professions. It is beneficial on both the personal and the public
levels
.