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.
Arguments fails to warrant on numerous fronts. Firstly, it fails to justify the severity of the deficency.What portion of the Tagus population is suffering from this deficiency. Secondly, it fails to justify whether the impact that the new breed of of millet will be adequate to deal with the problem. Author also fails to mention whether these subsidies are concomitant with high of cost of new millets. Finally, millet being a staple food does not justify whether the breed will be accepted in a similar manner.
The severity of the defciency plays a key role in determining the viability of producing this Vitamin A rich food. Some number or summary statistics is necessary before any costly measure is taken. Even if statistics are presented to justify the condition, the need for new breed is not justified because of other factors like cost and prior breed of millets.
Are the subsidies enough to compensate for the cost? The subisidies are based on the fact new breed millets will sell for tackling the deficiency. But this is based on the assumption that the taste of the old millets and new millets will be similar or they will possess similar charcteristics. The authors assumption on the similarity between the two types of millets weakens his position. Strengthen the conclusion requires some evidence justifying the fact that people will be equally consume the new breed as they used to consume the older breed.
Consequently, if the sale is of the new breed is not equal to the old breed, then the subsidies which are planned to manage the expenses to grow the new breed will fall short. Which only serves to further weaken the conclusion.
Hence, the argument fails to adequately account for the various assumption which if do not hold true weaken the argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 302 350
No. of Characters: 1449 1500
No. of Different Words: 151 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.169 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.798 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.527 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 100 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 84 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 46 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.875 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.313 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.326 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.575 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 107, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: What
...o justify the severity of the deficency.What portion of the Tagus population is suff...
^^^^
Line 1, column 247, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: of
...y whether the impact that the new breed of of millet will be adequate to deal with th...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 494, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a similar manner" with adverb for "similar"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...tify whether the breed will be accepted in a similar manner. The severity of the defciency plays...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 297, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the need for new breed is not justified because of other factors like cost and p...
^^
Line 5, column 299, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ill possess similar charcteristics. The authors assumption on the similarity between th...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 177, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... to grow the new breed will fall short. Which only serves to further weaken the concl...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 82, Rule ID: IF_IS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...ccount for the various assumption which if do not hold true weaken the argument.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, second, secondly, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 28.8173652695 42% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1489.0 2260.96107784 66% => OK
No of words: 301.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94684385382 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66177444789 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 204.123752495 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.504983388704 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 705.55239521 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.4373983738 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.0625 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8125 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4375 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.323619744379 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103866694228 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0709548159553 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15805748668 0.128457276422 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.089980716813 0.0628817314937 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.