An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
The given argument addresses the problem of an impoverished nation, Tagus. It is very essential to provide a strong backing to the solutions suggested for the upliftment of an entire nation. Some of the vital parameters to be considered while analyzing the feasibility of the proposed solution are discussed here.
A new breed of millet high in vitamin A has been engineered and farmers are being encouraged to cultivate it. A question to be addressed here is, 'How different are the practices involved in the cultivation of the new breed as compared to the old one?' Also, 'Are the farmers willing to adapt to these new practices?' The economic feasibility is not the only driving force for a farmer to consider alternatives to the present status quo. Skill development is an important factor for the operational feasibility of any plan.
It has been mentioned that millet being a staple food in Tagus, the engineered millet would be readily adopted by people. An intriguing question to be considered here is,'Are the citizens willing to switch to an artificially stimulated breed of their regular staple? If the citizens of the country are skeptical about the doctored breed and have little trust on the organization, the conclusion made in the argument about the adaptability of the new millet may be quite optimistic. Also, if the new type of millet is not equivalent in cost to the old type of millet, the plan would miss out on a major chunk of financially distressed population.
The suggestion for the government of Tagus to aggressively promote the new type of millet lacks certain considerations. A comprehensive analysis needs to be done to determine the resources required for the progression of this campaign. A trade-off needs to be established between the degree of goal achieved and the opportunity profits given away by directing the various funds to the mentioned campaign.
Thus, questions covering the economic, operational and social feasibility of the proposed measures need to be answered before implementation.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1668 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.009 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.046 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 121 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.786 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.162 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.357 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.555 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.078 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 192, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...for the upliftment of an entire nation. Some of the vital parameters to be considered while...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 170, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , Are
...iguing question to be considered here is,Are the citizens willing to switch to an ar...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, so, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 13.6137724551 7% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 28.8173652695 24% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1708.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 332.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14457831325 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.2685907696 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09221626387 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.530120481928 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.9997829855 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.75 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.875 5.70786347227 33% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.410642928689 0.218282227539 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125335939567 0.0743258471296 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0862148978659 0.0701772020484 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184597240153 0.128457276422 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105864313206 0.0628817314937 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
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.