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 p

Essay topics:

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 states a strategy to combat the deficiency of vitamin A among the people of Tagus. This strategy revolves around the adoption of a new variety of the seed of millet which has a higher content of vitamin A. In providing this hypothesis; it fails to answer several questions, which will directly affect the viability of this suggestion. Also, the assumptions taken by the international development organization fails to provide substantial reasons to bolster its claim that the new variety of millet will normalize the vitamin A deficiency.

First, it talks about the introduction of a new type of millet seed, which supposedly has higher vitamin A. There are several questions regarding the quality of seeds that should be answered before its introduction. First, whether the new seed has been tested and approved by the World Health Organisation? What are the basic criteria that should be met before the introduction of a new variety of genetically engineered seed, and who is the issuing and certifying authority? Second, what are the effects of the introduction of the new seed to the soil of Tagus, whether it will have any long-term effect on the nutrients in the ground? What will be the requirement in terms of the irrigation, fertilizers, and the land quality in long-term and short-term use of the new variety of seed? If answers to these question are not positive, then the introduction may not be fit in long-term.

Second, from the financial point of view, it suggests that the new seeds will be subsidized which will make the new seeds readily available to the farmers, and they will not face any financial hardship. However, it fails to acknowledge the fact that new seeds may require a higher quantity of fertilizer and irrigation, the total effective cost of production may differ. In a cost comparison, The other costs should also be taken into consideration. Apart from these, yield per area of the field will also be a crucial factor, which should be properly focused on the introduction of the seed into te market. The effectivity of the new variety of seed will be beneficial only if it is cost comparative, and this should include everything i.e. cost of irrigation, pesticides, insecticide, fertilizer and the total yield.

Lastly, it states that millet is already a staple food in the Tagus, so the people will readily adopt the new variety in their food. There is always an apprehension among people whenever a new product is launched. Several factors will decide the adaptability of the new variety, for example, its cost, taste, digestibility, and side-effects. Another aspect to look would be a concentration of another nutrient in the new variety.

At last, the new variety of seed may be beneficial for the people of Tagus, but a detailed study based on several stated factors will make its cause more viable.

Votes
Average: 7.5 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, look, may, regarding, second, so, then, apart from, for example

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2389.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 478.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99790794979 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91017719696 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44769874477 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 748.8 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 3.0 0.471057884232 637% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4525981664 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.761904762 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7619047619 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85714285714 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => 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: 0.399507581029 0.218282227539 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130614740211 0.0743258471296 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0609618148042 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236385815264 0.128457276422 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0471806754879 0.0628817314937 75% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.