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.
The recommendation of the international development group makes a number of assumptions. First, it does not evaluate whether other sources of vitamin A exist in Tagus. Second, it assumes that the people of Tagus will adopt a new variety of millet since they already grow millet. Third, it assumes that the issue is a lack of food options instead of perhaps a lack of education around nutrition. Thus, the government of Tagus needs to ask several questions before adopting this new type of millet as a strategy for combatting vitamin A deficiency.
First, there needs to be an evaluation of why people are lacking vitamin A in their diets. It may be that there is already food available that is abundant in vitamin A, but that this food is prohibitively expensive for people to buy or that it is simply not a staple food, so people aren't eating enough of it. It may be cheaper to subsidize the purchase of a different type of food than to subsidize farmers for growing this new crop. The government should perform a cost-benefit analysis if other food sources exist to determine whether it is cheaper and more effective to subsidize already existing foo sources or promote a new crop.
Another issue may be a lack of education. If the people of Tagus are not informed about nutrition, they may be choosing not to eat available sources of vitamin A because they are simply not aware it is needed in their diet. The government should interview citizens to gain a better understanding of people's knowledge of nutrition and conduct a test of nutrition education programs in some villages to determine whether nutrition programs significantly improve the problem of vitamin A deficiency. An education program may be significantly cheaper than subsidizing farmers, and a cost-benefit analysis should be conducted along with the study of the effectiveness of education programs.
The recommendation assumes that people will readily adopt a new variety of millet. A subsidy alone might not necessarily incentivize people to purchase the new crop. The people may not trust the development organization or trust the new crop, or they may feel there is no need to switch to something new. To answer the question of whether people will readily adopt a new variety of millet, the government should conduct a study in some villages, using different levels of subsidies, and similarly to the nutrition program study, interview people to understand their attitude toward this new crop before and after introducing it.
In conclusion, there is a significant amount of unknown information about the availability of other food sources, the nutrition education of the citizens of Tagus, and the openness to a new variety of millet. Before assuming the new seed is the best solution, the government of Tagus must look at quantitative factors such as cost, along with collecting qualitative information about people's diets, attitude toward a new seed, and people's willingness to purchase the seed with different levels of subsidies. Only until this information is collected can it be determined whether the new breed of millet is the best solution to vitamin A deficiency in Tagus.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...aluate whether other sources of vitamin A exist in Tagus. Second, it assumes that the p...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 284, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
... is simply not a staple food, so people arent eating enough of it. It may be cheaper ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 316, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...d to switch to something new. To answer the question of whether people will readily adopt a new variety...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, look, may, second, similarly, so, third, thus, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 12.9106741573 232% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2656.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 523.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07839388145 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78217453174 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94774354469 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.401529636711 0.4932671777 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 856.8 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.1924372887 60.3974514979 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.8 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.15 23.4991977007 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 5.21951772744 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.370684390073 0.243740707755 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127054747218 0.0831039109588 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0737795526952 0.0758088955206 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224815650127 0.150359130593 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0650040090853 0.0667264976115 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 100.480337079 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.