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.
While this recommendation sounds plausible, the International development organization should answer the following questions to better predict if their recommendation will have the predicted results:
- Will the new breed of millet retain its other features with the increase in Vitamin A? This question must be answered because the success of the recommendation is dependent on the assumption that the people will accept the new breed of millet. However, this may not hold true if the millet changes in taste, texture or other features which makes it palatable to the people of Tagus. A change is the taste or feel of the new breed of millet might make the people reject this new breed of millet. Thus, to evaluate the success of this recommendation, the question on whether the features that make the people readily consume the current breed of millet will be retained in the new breed.
- Do the farmers have the expertise to grow this new type of millet?
The change in the breed of millet might also translate to a change in the farming practices required to maintain it. If the farmers do not know how to farm it, subsidies will not be enough to convince them to change to this type of millet.
- Do the people support and accept the legitimacy of the government?
If the people in the country are dissatisfied with the government, the government espousing this cause will only deter them from accepting the new breed of millet instead of encouraging them to accept it.
- How responsive are the people to change? People in rural areas and underdeveloped communities tend to view things associated with modern technology with skepticism. If the people are resistant to change, they may buck the government's attempts to encourage them to accept this new variety. Thus, the readiness of people to accept new technology will help evaluate the likelihood of success of the recommendation.
- Is the government the best party to promote the new type of millet? The government is just one political agent in the society. There are other parties who can champion the new variety of millet such as private organisations, charities, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), etc. The recommendation may not have the predicted result if the government is being asked to promote this type of millet while there are other stakeholders that can do it better.
- Will the subsidies cover for the additional cost?
In conclusion, while this recommendation may be successful, the questions discussed above need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result.
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 427 350
No. of Characters: 2116 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.546 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.956 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.924 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.529 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.427 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.485 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.202 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, so, thus, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2175.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 427.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09367681499 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99567396062 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.430913348946 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 672.3 705.55239521 95% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.6699884622 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.75 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.35 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.15 5.70786347227 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 10.0 5.15768463074 194% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.39031417851 0.218282227539 179% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135741085266 0.0743258471296 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0799894737164 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154895672807 0.128457276422 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0856474547105 0.0628817314937 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.