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.
The author of the statement claims that interview-cenetred method is better than obeservation-centered method and his research will out-turn the research conducted by Dr. Field. Dr. Field has observed during his study that the children of the island of Tertia are not only raised by their parents but also by the people of the entire village. To prove the study of Dr.Field wrong, the author of the statement claims that the children of the Tartia islands spent much more time talking about their biological parents rather than the other people of their village, during the interviews conducted by the students of Dr. Karp. However, the statement is problematic in several critical ways.
First of all, the author assumes that the interview-based method for anthropological study for child rearing practices in the Tertian islands will provide the better results today than that of Dr. Field's. However, Dr. Field has conducted his study twenty years ago and in twenty years, social culture of islands of Tertia may have changed and people of Tertia may have shifted towards small families where biological parents may have more responsibility of their children. Thus, the statement does not provide the current scenario of Tartian islands for children rearing practices.
Secondly, the author fails to provide enough information about his interview-based method to advocate his conclusion. There might be a chance that the conclusion derived by the author might be because of biased questions that may have been lead to the biased conclusion. The argument does not contain information about the questions asked to the children during those interviews. The argument also does not provide statistical information such as how many children were included for the study and how much time was spent to conduct this study?
Thirdly, the argument also fails to provide the information about the children's age. If the children participated in interview were very young then their answers might not be credible. The author fails to clarify the credibility of children's answers during the interview. The statement does not clarify that whether the children participated in the interview were telling the truth or not. Similarly, the author does not give satisfactory evidences proving why Dr. Field's observational method is incorrect.
In conclusion, the statement is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author needs to cite more evidences such as the method used by Tartians to raise the children when the interviews were conducted. The author also needs to provide statistical data of the interview-method to advocate his interview-based method. Finally, the author also needs thorough evidences proving his interview-based method is better than the observation-centered method used by Dr. Field, to study the children rearing method used by Tartians.
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: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 450 350
No. of Characters: 2382 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.606 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.293 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.999 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 182 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 57 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.684 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.211 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.387 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.583 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.142 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 369, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Field
...ntire village. To prove the study of Dr.Field wrong, the author of the statement clai...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 86, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...he information about the childrens age. If the children participated in interview ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, in conclusion, such as, talking about, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2429.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 449.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40979955457 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60321845022 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04207331413 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.409799554566 0.468620217663 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 725.4 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.9240352446 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.45 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.45 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.85 5.70786347227 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.267583101281 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0892557125763 0.0743258471296 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0773921922486 0.0701772020484 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167209578503 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0811479410267 0.0628817314937 129% => 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: 14.39 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.79 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 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.