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 of the argument is convinced that the government should be actively touting and promoting this new type of engineered millet to tackle the deficiency of vitamin A among the people of Tagus. The author cites that the government is willing to provide and equip the farmers with subsidies so as to tackle the purported high price of the farming the new millet variety as well. The author also claims that millet putatively being the staple food of Tagus, people will be willingly taking up this millet in their daily diet plans. The argument seems to be based on some unwarranted assumptions that might render the argument weak and also discrepancies between the actual results and what the author claims might be larger than expected.
Firstly, the author fails to quantify the increase in the cost of farming that would be evident once the farmers start cultivating. "More" doesn't provide us the clarity of how much exactly will be the increase in price and will the government subsidies be enough for farmers to maintain steady cultivation of these crops along with their households. Perhaps, the government subsidies will be enough to purchase the seeds for the crop but not for the cultivation and harvesting process. This might lead to severe problems where farmers might compromise with other regular and staple crops that sustain the country. This might be deleterious for the country on a large scale which is already classified as impoverished. The author must provide some insights on the increase in the price of farming that this new variety of millet might engender.
Though, millet might be a staple food for the people of Tagus the new millet might not be adopted by the people readily if there are noticeable differences in the gustatory aspects of the millet. Perhaps the new variety of millet is not tasteful enough or its integrity, when used in cooking, fails to hold as the normal variety available to the people. This might lead to people rejecting the new variety of millet. The author must specify specific reasons for how the millet is similar to the staple millet so that the new millet will successfully be adopted by the people.
Lastly, the new variety of millet that has been engineered and the advantages it proposed sounds questionable. Perhaps, the international development organization is yet to test the millet and conduct surveys of how effective it actually is and to judge any potential side effects. It is possible that the international organization cited has low credibility in the medical and nutritional professional's community and fraternity. The author must provide the International Organization's standings in the scientific community and should wait for the survey if it is to be conducted to test the efficacy of the millet. Sufficient studies regarding this millet must be cited and discussions in the medical community must be encouraged. This would also provide a sense of trust or credibility to the people of Tagus who will then be convinced to try the new millet.
In sum, the recommendation as of now stands weak and needs the answers to the questions and concerns as mentioned before. If the author considers the above suggestions to quantify the effects it will have on farming, and also justify the credibility of the millet and its benefits, I think the author will make a cogent case.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 562 350
No. of Characters: 2757 1500
No. of Different Words: 231 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.869 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.906 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.718 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 208 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.095 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.591 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.557 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.141 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 298, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...de and equip the farmers with subsidies so as to tackle the purported high price of the ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 386, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...farming the new millet variety as well. The author also claims that millet putative...
^^^
Line 1, column 538, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... this millet in their daily diet plans. The argument seems to be based on some unwa...
^^^
Line 3, column 150, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ers start cultivating. 'More' doesnt provide us the clarity of how much exac...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 391, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professionals'' or 'professional's'?
Suggestion: professionals'; professional's
...dibility in the medical and nutritional professionals community and fraternity. The author mu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, if, lastly, regarding, so, then, well, as to, i think
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.9520958084 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2816.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 561.0 441.139720559 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01960784314 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.86676880123 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80022772079 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.411764705882 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 872.1 705.55239521 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.8918216934 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.0 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.09090909091 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.398091354522 0.218282227539 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.134290772665 0.0743258471296 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0850278426813 0.0701772020484 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224563840218 0.128457276422 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0950093867714 0.0628817314937 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.