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 government has taken a very creative initiative to introduce a Vitamin A as a part of food, which forms a great part of daily routine of the inhabitants. However, the idea is flawed and is subject to a lot of questions, that needs to be answered before executing this idea publicly.
Firstly, though the International Development organization has create a new breed of millet that has abundance of Vitamin A, they haven't stated anything regarding their test in the environmental conditions of Tagus. There is a possibility that this new breed of millet won't withstand the weather conditions of Tagus. Like, the new breed of millet require exuberant water, which would not so easily available in Tagus.
Secondly, the recommendation states that farmers can easily grow the new breed as a replacement for the existing one. What it doesn't consider is their source of income. The farmers of Tagus could be using millet as their source of income. If the farmers grows this new breed of millet and is not accepted among their market, they would be at a great loss, which will hamper their source of income. Also, the change in price of the seeds, will eventually result in increase of selling price. There is no mention of market that is willing to pay high price for a staple food item.
Thirdly, the recommendation does not state the testing of the given breed of millet on the people of Tagus. Considering the genetic development of Tagus residents, there is a possibility that millet might not actually fraught the deficiency of Vitamin A, and even if it does, there is no mention of any side effect that might result from consumption of the new breed.
Though the initiative is well formed and guided, it needs to investigate the new breed at local level, which will help them with better understanding of the realistic output.
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 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 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 64, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'created'.
Suggestion: created
...ernational Development organization has create a new breed of millet that has abundanc...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'regarding', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'third', 'thirdly', 'well']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.259052924791 0.25644967241 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.147632311978 0.15541462614 95% => OK
Adjectives: 0.058495821727 0.0836205057962 70% => OK
Adverbs: 0.050139275766 0.0520304965353 96% => OK
Pronouns: 0.033426183844 0.0272364105082 123% => OK
Prepositions: 0.136490250696 0.125424944231 109% => OK
Participles: 0.0362116991643 0.0416121511921 87% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.79714788332 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0139275766017 0.026700313972 52% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.114206128134 0.113004496875 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.025069637883 0.0255425247493 98% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0278551532033 0.0127820249294 218% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1860.0 2731.13054187 68% => OK
No of words: 315.0 446.07635468 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.90476190476 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.57801047555 92% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.346031746032 0.378187486979 91% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.225396825397 0.287650121315 78% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.152380952381 0.208842608468 73% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.11746031746 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79714788332 2.79052419416 100% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 207.018472906 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.488888888889 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 49.062637295 52.1807786196 94% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.039408867 70% => OK
Sentence length: 22.5 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.671824479 57.7814097925 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.857142857 141.986410481 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.928571428571 0.724660767414 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 45.0396825397 51.9672348444 87% => OK
Elegance: 1.86746987952 1.8405768891 101% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.477800914011 0.441005458295 108% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.159936855914 0.135418324435 118% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.111545004067 0.0829849096947 134% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.658431056993 0.58762219726 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.176914880527 0.147661913831 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.220606139893 0.193483328276 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0911294777697 0.0970749176394 94% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.403465420454 0.42659136922 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.102077152619 0.0774707102158 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.304333452631 0.312017818177 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109256147434 0.0698173142475 156% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.87684729064 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 0.0 5.36822660099 0% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.82389162562 177% => OK
Total topic words: 11.0 14.657635468 75% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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 to cover all aspects.