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.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author argues that the new breed of millet high in vitamin A should promote by the government of Tagus to combat with its deficiency with providing the argument that event it is expensive, the farmer will be paid subsidies for farming and new variety will be a staple food because millet is already adopted by people is flawed. The author provides insufficient information about the cost of seeds and the amount of money for farming, also there is no mention of the actual quantity of vitamin A in a new variety. Furthermore, the author put millet and new variety in the same categories without mentioning their similar characteristics.
First, according to the author, the cost of seeds is high and the farmer will be provided extra money for farming. It is not mentioned that the cost of farming is the same or not as before, for example, the new variety might be required more amount of irrigation and fertilizers. The cost is not calculated. Moreover, the comparative cost value is not mentioned. The word "more'' is vague, whether it means slightly more or heavily more. The writer should mention all of these things in his/her argument so that it could be more convenient to take a decision.
Second, The new variety of millet contains high in vitamin A is not supported statistically. How much percentage greater in the amount of Vitamin A is contained in that variety of millet? Whether it is greater than another kind of breed? There is no comparative study with other kinds of the breed, neither the numerical value is mentioned. In this case, too, the author takes one-sided decision.
Furthermore, the author assumes that the new variety of millet will be adopted easily as the previous millet. But the author fails to give clear similarity between two kinds. However, he kept both in single categories, there is no any similar characteristics were mentioned. For example , they might same in color or not, whether they tase same or not etc. If the author could mentions their similarities it could be easy to do comparative study and take decision more effectively.
In conclusion, the author decision is completely bottomless, so more research should be done to corroborate the conclusion as mentioned above paragraphs.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 1813 1500
No. of Different Words: 168 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.796 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.698 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 132 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 96 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 58 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.316 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.535 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.126 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oning their similar characteristics. First, according to the author, the cost...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... more convenient to take a decision. Second, The new variety of millet contai...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the author takes one-sided decision. Furthermore, the author assumes that the...
^^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...ept both in single categories, there is no any similar characteristics were mentio...
^^
Line 7, column 290, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...racteristics were mentioned. For example , they might same in color or not, whethe...
^^
Line 7, column 304, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: same
...ere mentioned. For example , they might same in color or not, whether they tase same or not e...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 381, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'mention'
Suggestion: mention
...se same or not etc. If the author could mentions their similarities it could be easy to ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, so, for example, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1874.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 377.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97082228117 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8370459672 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.472148541114 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 596.7 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 63.6995094173 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.7 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.85 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331736168375 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0973752171523 0.0743258471296 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0914704728993 0.0701772020484 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181214743677 0.128457276422 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102110016212 0.0628817314937 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.05 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => 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.