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 argument suggests that in order to tackle the problem of vitamin A deficiency in the nation of Tagus, the government must promote a shift from traditional quality of millet to a new and vitamin A rich quality. The author supports this argument with the observation that since the people of Tagus have millet in their staple diet they will readily adopt to the new variety. And that even though the new variety would be expensive to cultivate for the farmer, additional subsidies by the government would be able to offset that additional cost. The argument seems valid at first with its supporting argument, however it makes some assumptions which are not backed by enough evidence.
To start with, the development organization assumes that the farmers would be willing to change to a new variety of millet without any apprehension. This is based on the assumption that the government would be providing them subsidy to cover the additional costs, since the new seeds would be expensive than the earlier variety. But, it is not mentioned how much would the additional cost be and what amount of subsidy would the government would be willing to provide. And what if even after the subsidy, cultivating the new variety is more expensive than the traditional one? Would then the farmers still want to shift to the new variety? This information is required as it may jeopardize the assumption that farmers are okay with the new variety. The farmers might just reject the idea of shift in their current pattern because the shift may simply be not profitable to them.
The author also suggests that the new variety of millet would find similar acceptance like the traditional variety because millet is a stable food for the people of Tagus. This argument is flawed as it cannot be established from the presented evidence that a population which is used to eating millets would accept any new variety. It may on the other hand reject the new variety because it might not taste the same. The organization must therefore provide further evidence. Maybe they can conduct surveys and trials testing the acceptance of cooked new variety of millet, this would make their case stronger as it would support the claim that people of Tagus have no apprehension changing to a new variety of millets. This result would also act as a confidence booster for farmers who might be apprehensive about finding market to sell their new variety millets.
It is a noble idea to shift to a more nutrient rich variety of millet to tackle the issue of vitamin deficiency in people. However, the present argument and the assumptions on which it stands fall short of making it clear whether the farmers or the people would be willing to accept this change. The author must answer if the shift would be profitable to the farmers and quality acceptable to the people before concluding and asking the government to promote the new variety. The author must also address the lack of evidence for the assumptions made for the arguments.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 352, Rule ID: ADOPT_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'adapt to'?
Suggestion: adapt to
... in their staple diet they will readily adopt to the new variety. And that even though t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 610, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...et, this would make their case stronger as it would support the claim that people ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'therefore', 'to start with', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.220994475138 0.25644967241 86% => OK
Verbs: 0.151012891344 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.101289134438 0.0836205057962 121% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0386740331492 0.0520304965353 74% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0349907918969 0.0272364105082 128% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.125230202578 0.125424944231 100% => OK
Participles: 0.036832412523 0.0416121511921 89% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.57516105667 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0423572744015 0.026700313972 159% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.14364640884 0.113004496875 127% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0534069981584 0.0255425247493 209% => Less modal verbs wanted (like 'must , shall , will , should , would , can , could , may , and might').
WH_determiners: 0.0147329650092 0.0127820249294 115% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3007.0 2731.13054187 110% => OK
No of words: 512.0 446.07635468 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.873046875 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75682846001 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.353515625 0.378187486979 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263671875 0.287650121315 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.15234375 0.208842608468 73% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.1015625 0.135150697306 75% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57516105667 2.79052419416 92% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 207.018472906 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.408203125 0.469332199767 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 46.4836926824 52.1807786196 89% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 24.380952381 23.2022227129 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.5494548207 57.7814097925 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.19047619 141.986410481 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.380952381 23.2022227129 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.571428571429 0.724660767414 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 50.748139881 51.9672348444 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.70491803279 1.8405768891 93% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.349892967117 0.441005458295 79% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.148972804252 0.135418324435 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0844496503979 0.0829849096947 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.612187610491 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.140898303454 0.147661913831 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.166920498935 0.193483328276 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.097886595751 0.0970749176394 101% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.630522175537 0.42659136922 148% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0248432733582 0.0774707102158 32% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.289678043132 0.312017818177 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038391228192 0.0698173142475 55% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 12.0 6.46551724138 186% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.82389162562 177% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.