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 is certainly a prudent one which is directly tackling the issue of impoverishment in Tagus. There are many questions that need to be answered for effective implementation.
Firstly, the recommendation mentions "engineered" for the new breed of millet, and doesn't imply field trials. As is the case with lab results, field trials are very important to assess mass production according to local cropping systems. Field trials would help in estimating actual production thus quantifying targets for reducing impoverishment.
Secondly, it is already established that Tagus is an impoverished nation. One could argue that the current agriculture infrastructure is lacking in technology and/or labour, and/or capital. Thus subsidies for farming should not only take into account the high costs of millets, but also the infrastructure needs of the farming system. It should also include technology transfer to cultivating engineered millet as part of the financing package
Thirdly, if millet is already a staple food, why is there any deficiency already existing? Could the reason for impoverishment be turn out to be something else. Engineered millet could be the first step in the right direction, but it is important to assess the causes of impoverishment, else the issue might persist even after intervention.
Finally, actually quantity of vitamin A must analysed by testing retail millet samples to understand the effectiveness of recommendation, so that optimization could
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 50
- 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 33
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 94, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...' for the new breed of millet, and doesnt imply field trials. As is the case with...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 191, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...chnology and/or labour, and/or capital. Thus subsidies for farming should not only t...
^^^^
Line 9, column 444, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... millet as part of the financing package Thirdly, if millet is already a staple f...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 28.8173652695 24% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 55.5748502994 43% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1297.0 2260.96107784 57% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 226.0 441.139720559 51% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7389380531 5.12650576532 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87727950738 4.56307096286 85% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.46570920038 2.78398813304 124% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 204.123752495 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.632743362832 0.468620217663 135% => OK
syllable_count: 395.1 705.55239521 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5903484697 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.083333333 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8333333333 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 5.70786347227 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.244272579973 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0783509631561 0.0743258471296 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531632051651 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112453631221 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0246681044284 0.0628817314937 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.01 12.5979740519 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.32208582834 114% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.