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.
The author of the article, Dr.Karp, claims that Dr.Field's conclusion and his use of method that brought out the conclusion is invalid, and suggests several reasons that seem to uphold his/her claim. However, the article is rife with holes and assumptions, which needs to be eliminated for Dr.Karp to maintain his/her claim with clear warrant. Such flaws will be discussed with further details below.
First of all, Dr.Karp indicates that by interviewing the children, he/she found out that children are reared by their biological parents. However, he/she needs to clarify the numerical amount of interviews conducted and whether the assorted interviewees are representative enough for the whole children. If the interviews were conducted only on two to three children among hundreds of children in the village, then the results may be unreliable. Moreover, Dr.Karp needs to clarify how the interviewees were selected. Maybe he/she conducted interviews only to those who were close to and relied only on their parents. For both cases mentioned in the paragraph, the collected results would be invalid to be generalized to all children in the village.
Furthermore, the author of the article starts with a premise, believing that the way children are reared must not have changed since twenty years ago. However, this is clearly an unwarranted premise. Maybe the children's behaviors were affected by the entire village twenty years ago but has changed gradually and is now influenced only by their biological parents. The conventional behavior can always change if there are alterations that need to be made. Maybe other adults' perspectives were reliable in the past because all the adults had equal passion to teach lessons to every children regardless of the biological status. This might have changed as time fled by because adults are impartial nowadays and are only discerned with their own biological children. If this is the case, both Dr.Karp's and Dr.Field's view and their methods are valid and asserting that Dr.Karp's conclusion and his/her observation-centered approach is invalid would be unwarranted.
Last but not least, children talking about their biological parents more than other adults does not always indicate that their actions are reared only by their biological parents. Maybe children conversed about their parents much more because they felt more affectionate towards their parents, but still respected all the adults' perspectives. There is also a possibility that children only mentioned about the negativeness of their parents' views and did not wish to be influenced by them. Dr.Karp would have to provide the readers substantial information about the interview results, whether the children were talking about how they admired and wished to pursue as their parents wished or not.
To sum up, even though Dr.Karp's claim seems plausible, through thorough investigation and reading the article from various points of view, it is confirmed that his/her claim is unwarranted. He/she would have to eliminate the flaws of starting with an invalid premise, making haste assumptions, and providing lack of information about the interview in order to maintain his/her claim.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 518 350
No. of Characters: 2630 1500
No. of Different Words: 228 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.771 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.077 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.723 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 187 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 154 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.488 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.315 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.315 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.15 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 31, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
The author of the article, Dr.Karp, claims that Dr.Fields conclusion and h...
^^^^
Line 1, column 52, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Fields
...of the article, Dr.Karp, claims that Dr.Fields conclusion and his use of method that b...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 293, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...ns, which needs to be eliminated for Dr.Karp to maintain his/her claim with clear wa...
^^^^
Line 2, column 17, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...urther details below. First of all, Dr.Karp indicates that by interviewing the chil...
^^^^
Line 2, column 459, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...results may be unreliable. Moreover, Dr.Karp needs to clarify how the interviewees w...
^^^^
Line 3, column 793, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
... children. If this is the case, both Dr.Karps and Dr.Fields view and their methods ar...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 806, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Fields
... this is the case, both Dr.Karps and Dr.Fields view and their methods are valid and as...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 868, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
...methods are valid and asserting that Dr.Karps conclusion and his/her observation-cent...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 492, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...d not wish to be influenced by them. Dr.Karp would have to provide the readers subst...
^^^^
Line 5, column 26, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
...shed or not. To sum up, even though Dr.Karps claim seems plausible, through thorough...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, talking about, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 28.8173652695 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 16.3942115768 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2696.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 499.0 441.139720559 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40280561122 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72634191566 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79146735442 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4749498998 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 801.9 705.55239521 114% => 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
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.8809490405 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.545454545 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6818181818 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.18181818182 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 14.0 4.67664670659 299% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202981801769 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0675670780738 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0522596977538 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121128942598 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0515273997236 0.0628817314937 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.