An international development organization is assessing a vitamin A deficiency in the impoverished nation of Tagus. The organization suggests that by increasing the production of a newly engineered millet, the deficiency can effectively be combated. While the idea may indeed hold merit, several critical assumptions will need to be addressed in order to ensure the plan's complete success.
Perhaps the most critical assumption concerns the pathology behind the vitamin A deficiency. The bulk of the argument rests on the idea that the deficiency is the result of a dietary inefficiency. A more thorough examination of the at risk population would be of great value. The argument would crumble if one were to discover that the average individual actually consumes an incredibly high amount of vitamin A on a daily basis. And perhaps the underlying cause of the deficiency is related to physiological abnormalities. A lacking in other vitamins or minerals may lead to a decreased absorption rate. Or perhaps a toxic substance is hindering or limiting the body's vitamin A uptake. Therefore, promoted production of a staple high in vitamin A would be utterly ineffective. Before the organizations response is initiated, clarification would be essential.
An additional assumption surrounding the argument related to the use of the costly new breed of millet. The author states that this newly engineered breed of vitamin A is costly. There would clearly be obstacles to the production of any costly staple. Therefore, the organization suggests offering subsidies for the farming of the new variety of millet. However, a more critical examination of the other readily available foods in the Tagus economy is necessary. Perhaps there are other cheaper foods already available in the area that are high in vitamin A. With this in mind, merely encouraging the citizens of Tagus to eat more of a certain already available foods would be just as effective as introducing a whole new breed of millet. Farming of the new millet would therefore become an unnecessary cost.
Lastly, the author suggests that because millet is already a staple in Tagus, the people will readily adopt the new variety. This plays off the assumption that the newly engineered millet will definitively have the same characteristics as traditional millet. If one were to find the flavor profiles, textures, or even colors to be wildly different, acceptance of the new millet would be questionable. It would be critical to determine why and how the population uses millet to ensure the new product is even comparable. The organization would benefit from a thorough comparison between traditional and new millet characteristics.
Conclusively, the international organization's suggested course of action may hold true under the right circumstances. However, the proposal is rife with assumptions. If the course of action is to be effective and efficient, several questions need to be addressed and a more thorough analysis of critical factors is clearly necessary.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 478 350
No. of Characters: 2505 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.676 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.241 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.119 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 198 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 156 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 114 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 83 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.704 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.826 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.444 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.482 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
An international development organizatio...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to ensure the plans complete success. Perhaps the most critical assumption con...
^^^
Line 4, column 790, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'organizations'' or 'organization's'?
Suggestion: organizations'; organization's
...ould be utterly ineffective. Before the organizations response is initiated, clarification wo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed, clarification would be essential. An additional assumption surrounding the...
^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...therefore become an unnecessary cost. Lastly, the author suggests that because...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ional and new millet characteristics. Conclusively, the international organiza...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, however, if, lastly, may, so, therefore, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2564.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 478.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3640167364 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20185123532 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44769874477 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 847.8 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.5881963362 57.8364921388 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 91.5714285714 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0714285714 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.70786347227 35% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.430415155536 0.218282227539 197% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111108804911 0.0743258471296 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0737099498822 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227413853612 0.128457276422 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103904971835 0.0628817314937 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 48.3550499002 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.51 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 98.500998004 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.