It appears that the recommendation would ameliorate the vitamin A deficiency of the people, but there are a few loopholes in the reasoning presented. Therefore the following questions need to be addressed.
Firstly, Will the cultivation of the new breed be equally or more profitable for the farmers? If the answer is in negative, most farmers would not shift from the old seeds. If they still do shift, it will cause them to get less profit, which might be an undesirable side effect.
Secondly, is there a noticeable taste difference between the old millet and the new millet? Since millet is the staple food for the people of Tagus, the change in taste might cause them to be resistant to the new variety.
Thirdly, does the change from the old variety to the new result in the body absorbing enough vitamin A to combat the deficiency? If not, to what degree does it improve the situation? Knowing this is important as it is possible that the body does not absorb any vitamin A though millet. This would make the recommendation to fail to cause any impact.
Lastly, does consuming this new variety in copious amounts cause any harm? As millet is an integral part of the diet of the people, this is an important factor to consider.
The answers to these questions will help ensure that the adoption of the recommendation has desired results. If there are any possible negative consequences, knowing them beforehand would help in minimizing or even eliminating them. And if the cons outweigh the pros, one could work on an alternate method to respond to the vitamin A deficiency among people of Tagus.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 277 350
No. of Characters: 1292 1500
No. of Different Words: 141 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.08 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.664 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.623 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 89 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 63 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 40 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.312 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.181 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.688 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.326 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.618 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.102 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...w loopholes in the reasoning presented. Therefore the following questions need to be addr...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 324, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on an alternate method to respond to the vitamin A deficiency among people of Tag...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, third, thirdly
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 55.5748502994 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1341.0 2260.96107784 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 277.0 441.139720559 63% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84115523466 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7159197712 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 204.123752495 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516245487365 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 705.55239521 59% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.2366533738 57.8364921388 49% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.8125 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3125 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4375 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330610860531 0.218282227539 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100144108146 0.0743258471296 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0778483117434 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156475748724 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0506856656887 0.0628817314937 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 98.500998004 65% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.