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 has a lot of questions to be answered that are not given here. And it makes this argument unwarranted.
The main question comes about how this organization came to know that there is a lack of Vitamin A among people. If they surveyed this thing what factors have they considered in the survey as well as what was the survey size and who were included in the survey are not mentioned here. If the organization provides sufficient proof that there is a deficiency of Vitamin A among people. Then the government can take this issue seriously and do whatever possible things to eradicate this situation.
Secondly, the argument is not mentioning about the quantities of vitamin A in both types of seeds. It might be possible that the engineered millet has only a 10% high quantity of Vitamin A as compared to the previous one. And it won't help much to solve the problem. If it is given the quantities of Vitamin A in both of the millets then Government could decide, how much money they should spend to provide subsidy for the crop and how much they should spend on promoting and creating awareness about this crop among people.
Lastly, the argument is not providing the proof of what would be the farming cost of this millet, how much water should this crop required and all other parameters related to the agricultural science related to this crop. If it is not given then how government should decide how much money should they spend on subsidy and how farmers would decide what are they supposed to do to grow this crop. If these questions are not answered and if farmers start growing these crops up, it might possible they might end up spending a lot of money and get poor results.
One more thing, there is no mention of the taste difference in both of the millets. IF it is similar, people won't find much difficulty in adept this new crop. But, if the taste is weird then people might not adept it.
In conclusion, this argument has many unanswered statements that must be answered before working on the mentioned implementations.
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than 63
- 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 p 50
- 1. Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the posit 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 286, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT
Message: “If” 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.
...d in the survey are not mentioned here. If the organization provides sufficient pr...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, well, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1716.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 364.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.71428571429 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36792674256 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53257368641 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434065934066 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 524.7 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.7487760308 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.941176471 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4117647059 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.47058823529 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188397878842 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.067696337324 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524746645998 0.0701772020484 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0922809143888 0.128457276422 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0442499691698 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 48.3550499002 139% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.04 12.5979740519 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.41 8.32208582834 89% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.
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: 17 15
No. of Words: 366 350
No. of Characters: 1665 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.374 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.549 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.475 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 99 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 78 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.529 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.399 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.61 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.055 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5