The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
This argument deals with how Dr. Karp has refuted the conclusion and approach of Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, of child-rearing in the island of Tertia. Dr. Karp believes that his interview-based approach, used by his team of graduate students, will deliver far more accurate understandings than Dr. Field’s observation-based approach. The argument is unwarranted for the following reasons.
Firstly, Dr. Karp states that he and his team took interviews of children in the group of islands, which included Tertia, and came to the conclusion that children were spending more time with their biological parents than other adults in the village, in contrast to Dr. Field’s conclusion, which was made only about the children in the island of Tertia. If Dr. Field’s observations are to be true throughout these 20 years, then it is possible that the children in the other islands are spending more time with their biological parents, except for Tertia. Since there maybe a majority of such views, it has been claimed that children of all those islands spend more time with their biological parents. Also, there is no credible source to verify the veraciousness of these interviews conducted by Dr. Karp. The argument would have been strengthened, if there was a mention of a credible source covering these interviews.
Secondly, Dr. Karp states that the observation-centered approach to study cultures is invalid and that his interview-based approach is more accurate. What needs to be noted that Dr. Field made his conclusion 20 years ago. Since then, it is unknown how unsuccessful the observation-centered approach has been to declare it invalid or how successful the interview-centered approach has been to call it accurate. There is no mention of any other case study which has proved to be accurate using the interview-centered approach. Moreover, it can also be that Dr. Karp is stating these claims to gain popularity and fame. The argument would be more plausible if other case studies were mentioned, citing the approach used.
Finally, Dr. Karp states that his team of graduate students are using the interview-centered method in Tertia. Now, graduate students are not fully professional. Hence there is a possibility that they may make a mistake during their analysis and thus, the results may not turn out to be as accurate as stated by Dr. Karp. This may mean that Dr. Field’s conclusion could well prove to be more accurate than Dr. Karp’s. The argument would have been more valid if the experience and works of these graduate students were explicitly mentioned.
Therefore, for the above mentioned reasons, this argument is deemed unwarranted.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 323, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'invalids'?
Suggestion: invalids
...entered approach has been to declare it invalid or how successful the interview-centere...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 163, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...te students are not fully professional. Hence there is a possibility that they may ma...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, except for, in contrast, in contrast to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2267.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 430.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27209302326 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24548944393 2.78398813304 117% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.439534883721 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 675.9 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.7581268461 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.35 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35 5.70786347227 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
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: 0.251877207068 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.087008602522 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0827140373563 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145450978644 0.128457276422 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0912823827858 0.0628817314937 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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 by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.