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.
Benjamin Franklin once said, a half truth is often a great lie.
In this context, the recommendations presented here seem to be half-baked and a number of questions need to be answered in order to ensure that the recommendation will have its intended effect.
First and foremost, some vague terms need quantification here. The new millet is "high" in Vitamin A. The question arises, how "high"? Does the new millet variety offer adequate amount of Vitamin A, or is the higher amount still not as much desired by the experts? Alternately, is it so high that it may cause adverse effects in its consumers? Also, even if the millet is high on Vitamin A, is the new variant able to transfer the nutrient wholly to its consumers, or only a part of Vitamin A is absorbed by bodies? One can go forward with this recommendation, only if the quantity of Vitamin A is adequate in the new form of millet. Otherwise, there is no point in even considering this variant for promotion by the government.
Additionally, a related question arises is that how much millet do people of Tagus consume? Even though it is mentioned that millet is their staple food, how much of it do they consume on a daily basis and will the new variant of the millet provide them with required Vitamin A, if they continue to consume the same amount in future. If not, again the recommendation will not hold much water.
Also, if the new millet is indeed an answer to the Vitamin A deficiency among the people, a survey should also be conducted asking them if they will be willing to change replace the old variants they use, with the new one. It should not be assumed that the people will take to the new variety easily because everyone has their own tastes and preferences. If the people are not ready to switch, growing new type of millet may only cause financial losses to the farmers.
When talking of farmers, the recommendation mentions that the new variety millet seeds are costlier than usual but that they will be paid subsidies for planting it. One germane question that needs to be answered here is that will the farmers be able to afford planting the seeds even after the subsidy or will it still be too dear for them? If their cost of production goes up, will the people be willing to spare more from their pockets to buy this new millet type. Again, has the international organisation taken local factors into account - whether this new variety of millet will have the required conditions for plantation in Tagus? If the answer to these questions is no, then this particular recommendation is unlikely to have much effect in addressing Vitamin A deficiency, even if the government does everything to promote it.
Moreover, one also needs to ask if this new type is the only millet that has Vitamin A quantity in such high amounts or does any cheaper variety of millet offer similar properties. It would also be pertinent to know what other foods, preferable cheaper, are consumed by the people of Tagus, that may be high in Vitamin A, and perhaps can be suggested for consumption without any added financial burden.
Thus, in conclusion, one can say that these recommendations, even though made in good faith to improve the Vitamin A levels among people of Tagus, are not suggested after a holistic study. A number of questions need to be answered if the recommendations of the study is to prove fruitful.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 24 15
No. of Words: 595 350
No. of Characters: 2719 1500
No. of Different Words: 244 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.939 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.57 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.626 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.792 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.145 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.708 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.316 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.118 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 324, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...hey continue to consume the same amount in future. If not, again the recommendation will ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 261, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to plant'.
Suggestion: to plant
...that will the farmers be able to afford planting the seeds even after the subsidy or wil...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 116, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A level' or simply 'levels'?
Suggestion: A level; Levels
...de in good faith to improve the Vitamin A levels among people of Tagus, are not suggeste...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 289, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ions of the study is to prove fruitful.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, thus, in conclusion, talking of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 28.8173652695 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2817.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 595.0 441.139720559 135% => OK
Chars per words: 4.73445378151 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93888872473 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77973247617 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 204.123752495 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.442016806723 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 896.4 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.3049363262 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.68 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4 5.70786347227 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 8.0 5.15768463074 155% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.433065794106 0.218282227539 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127364103603 0.0743258471296 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0827037855671 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188651798157 0.128457276422 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.115944250697 0.0628817314937 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.45 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.