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 recommendation that the government of Tagus should to everything in its power to promote the engineered breed of millet is unwarranted as there is insufficient data to arrive at such conclusion.
While the nation of Tagus may be impoverished; the writer did not give any statistical proof to back this. The nature of their impoverishness could probably be due to their poor financial or economical status leading to a low standard of living. Even if Tagus is indeed impoverished, promoting the vitamin A enriched millet will not be of help if the citizen's biological system is well-adjusted to low vitamin A nutrient. An example is in the case of the Himalayans who live in the alps around Mount Everest. Himalayans have special lungs and circulatory systems that have long adapted to the low oxygen levels of the Himalaya mountain range. To insist on the promotion of the vitamin A fortified millet in Tagus would therefore be unjustified.
Futhermore, little informed is provided on the engineered millet. Food developed in the laboratory will need to have passed a series of tests and verifications to ensure it is fit for consumption; nothing in the write-up indicates that any such tests was conducted not to speak of passed. Even if the new millet has passed any such tests, what is to say it is edible for humans.
Also, the amount of subsidy that will be provided to the farmers is not stated. Who can say if the subsidy will cater for the cost to grow the new millet in place of the old one. It is very possible that the citizens may not be able to afford it at all.
In conclusion, it is clear that the writer's recommendation is not well thought-out, hence, credence cannot be given to it.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 298 350
No. of Characters: 1381 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.155 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.634 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.833 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 94 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 63 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.362 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.316 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.052 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 191, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...bably be due to their poor financial or economical status leading to a low standard of liv...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 37, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...l. In conclusion, it is clear that the writers recommendation is not well thought-out,...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, if, may, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1410.0 2260.96107784 62% => OK
No of words: 298.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.73154362416 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90337308046 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 204.123752495 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53355704698 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 456.3 705.55239521 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.2813049046 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.714285714 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2857142857 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.70786347227 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => 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: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.306354638026 0.218282227539 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0950345289212 0.0743258471296 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648246065723 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133387756255 0.128457276422 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0645766739866 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.15 12.5979740519 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 12.3882235529 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.