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 author concludes that, to combat vitamin A deficiency, it is necessary to promote the new type millet which is enriched with Vitamin A. However there are some other points need to be mentioned.
The statement made above is based on the assumption that, the new type of millet is rich enough with vitamin A to eradicate the health crisis. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will easily accept the new form. Also, the government will pay subsidies for the high price of new millet seeds. So, the author hopefully predicts that the new millet program will result in success.
There are several flaws in the above conclusion. First of all, there is no evidence of the actual reason behind the vitamin A deficiency. It may happen due to some other obscure diseases for which vitamin A of their body is declining. In this case, taking high vitamin A millet might not solve the issue. Also, the probability of successful harvest of this new type millet in abundant, is not stated. Farmers may face many difficulties for the first time and likely to produce a poor amount of the crops. Consequently the price may still be high even after government subsidies due to low supply which eventually will not inspire people to buy the new millet.
So, in order to make the project successful, the factors mentioned in the above passage, should be analysed. The government health department should find out the real reason of vitamin A deficiency and at the same time to the agriculture department needs to launch program to train the farmers about harvesting this new seeds.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-19 | lcosenza | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | Harshali_15 | 50 | view |
| 2019-10-17 | Roshan Dhakal | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-22 | PrincewillOkosun | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-21 | Tahmid Rakin Siddiqui | 50 | view |
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- Today, the high sales of popular consumer goods reflect the power of advertising and not the real needs of the society in which they are sold.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 56
- 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 30
- 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
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 506, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Consequently,
... to produce a poor amount of the crops. Consequently the price may still be high even after ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, however, if, may, so, still, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 14.8657303371 13% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 33.0505617978 27% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 58.6224719101 68% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1326.0 2235.4752809 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 274.0 442.535393258 62% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83941605839 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.55969084622 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52141977364 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 215.323595506 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514598540146 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 704.065955056 60% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7913334982 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.4 118.986275619 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2666666667 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.53333333333 5.21951772744 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.393125139219 0.243740707755 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128483275133 0.0831039109588 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0771450736244 0.0758088955206 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236746583894 0.150359130593 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.081494523091 0.0667264976115 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 100.480337079 56% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.