Charging Admission to Museums

The question

How to approach this discuss both views question

A discuss-both-views essay asks you to explain two opinions fairly and then give your own.

1. Introduce both views and say you will discuss them.
2. Paragraph 1: the first view with reasons and an example.
3. Paragraph 2: the second view with reasons and an example.
4. State your own opinion clearly (in the introduction or conclusion) and keep it consistent.

How to plan this answer

Structure

1. Introduction: paraphrase the debate about free entry to museums and heritage sites and state your own view on whether admission should be charged.
2. Body 1: the case for free entry, such as access for families with limited income and the public ownership of cultural heritage.
3. Body 2: the case for admission fees, such as the cost of conservation, staff and security, and the risk of closure without income.
4. Body 3 (optional): a middle path, such as free entry for residents or certain days with paid entry for visitors.
5. Conclusion: restate your opinion and say which funding method you believe is fairer.

Idea bank

• Many national museums in Europe are free to enter, which allows families with limited incomes to visit regularly and learn about history at no cost.
• Heritage sites are often publicly owned, so some argue that citizens should not have to pay to see a monument that belongs to the nation.
• Conservation of ancient buildings and fragile collections requires specialist staff, climate control and insurance, all of which cost money.
• Admission income can help a museum to fund exhibitions, education programmes and repairs, without relying entirely on government budgets.
• Free entry for residents with a local card, combined with paid entry for tourists, can protect access while still raising revenue.
• Some museums that introduced fees found that attendance from lower-income visitors fell sharply, which suggests the price itself acts as a barrier.

Useful vocabulary

• free admission: Free admission encourages families to visit museums more often.
• heritage site: A heritage site may need constant maintenance to remain safe for visitors.
• conservation: Conservation work can be expensive, particularly for ancient buildings.
• public funding: Public funding may not cover all the costs of running a large museum.
• entrance fee: An entrance fee can deter families who have limited spending money.
• accessibility: Accessibility is an important consideration when setting admission prices.
• cultural heritage: Cultural heritage belongs to the whole community, not only to paying visitors.
• a sustainable model: A sustainable model may combine modest fees with government support.
• it is reasonable to expect: It is reasonable to expect visitors to contribute to the upkeep of a major site.
• on balance: On balance, I favour free entry for residents with modest fees for tourists.

Common mistakes

• Assuming that all museums are the same, when a small local museum and a major national collection face different costs and audiences.
• Describing only the benefit of free entry without explaining how the museum would pay for its upkeep.
• Giving a fee example from a single country without any reasoning about why the result would apply more widely.
• Using the phrase 'culture should be free' as the main argument, which is an assertion rather than a reason.
• Ignoring the tourism income from paying visitors, which is a significant part of the case for admission charges at famous sites.

Examiner tip: Explain both the access argument and the funding argument clearly, and show how a middle option can address the concerns of each side.