1.1.Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather t

Essay topics:

1.1. Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

The note mentions that according to the two pieces of research conducted by Dr. Field and Dr. Krap with the difference of twenty years, some anthropologists propound the usage of interview-centered study instead of observation-based one to get the valid data about the method of parenting in Tertain. This is the recommendation cannot be accepted as it stands as it relies on the list of surmises all of which are skeptical; besides, for the verification of these hypotheses, some crucial inquiry should be responded.

The first issues are the scope and time factor of study considered by the anthropologists, while Dr. Field only specified his research on Tertain island, the Dr. Krap considered a list of islands which includes Tertain too. As mentioned, there is a difference in the considered population for the study; therefore, the concluded result will not be identical. In addition, there is the twenty-year difference between these two conducted studies, when there is the probability of the alteration in the parenting system. For verification of this comparison accuracy, some questions should be answered. The first question which should be answered is about the considered scope of the study, do the other islands in the list of Dr. Krap research possess the same cultural value as the Tertain island? Since there is the possibility of the variety of cultural values and kid sitting methods between Tertain island and others; besides, at those islands, the direct caring of the children is done by the biological parents instead of neighborhoods. Consequently, as the number of these islands were in the majority, the ultimate result is more inclined to the bulk. The second question concerns about the time variation factor, and the note should be responsible for the question that does all parenting pattern during the past twenty years was identical without the variation. Because, during these twenty years, the child generation considered by Dr. Field has become the adult and parent, and there is the probability that based on their childhood experiences, they prefer to rear their children by themselves rather than other people in the island. Therefore, the note should responses these question until verifies the accuracy of this comparison.

Another problem with the note is the method used by the Dr. Krap, the solo information about this study is its method; on the other hand, there is no clue about the number of kids who answer the questioner and type of the questions. For achieving the unshaken position, the note should answer some questions. Firstly, what is the population of considered kids for an interview? As known, the great the number of studied populations, the higher the reliability and validity of that research. In addition, can the ultimate output be generalized to the entire population? Since this study is human-based and various parameters such as the age range, family background, gender, education, genetics, and previous experiences have influence and lead to the alteration and variation of result from one person to another. In this case, the considered scope by Dr. Krap should be the exact indication of the public and not specified to a specific gender or age.

Finally, the advice considered by the anthropologists as the flawless method of examination and study of the cultural study is the interview-centered. Even by consideration of the error of Dr. Field finding this overgeneralization of this mistake and underestimation of the observation-based study is not a fair attitude toward the study. For cogent understating and recommendation, these anthropologists should answer whether is there any other anthropological study based on the observation which faces the failure and errs? If there is any, what are the ratio of their falsehood to entire done studies by this method? If there are other cases with a high ratio of failure, this advice can be accepted; otherwise, it is not acceptable.

To wrap it up, all the aforementioned questions, explicitly illustrate the shakiness of this recommendation and its requirement for further explanation and clarification.

Average: 3.5 (3 votes)
Essay Categories


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 171, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
... further explanation and clarification.

Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, consequently, finally, first, firstly, if, second, so, therefore, while, in addition, such as, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 91.0 55.5748502994 164% => OK
Nominalization: 37.0 16.3942115768 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3475.0 2260.96107784 154% => OK
No of words: 660.0 441.139720559 150% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26515151515 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.06857624559 4.56307096286 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18846167905 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 290.0 204.123752495 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.439393939394 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1095.3 705.55239521 155% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.9332996292 57.8364921388 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.0 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183018240388 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0508139546243 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.040220564842 0.0701772020484 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0942406268544 0.128457276422 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0492682105764 0.0628817314937 78% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 167.0 98.500998004 170% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

Write the essay in 30 minutes.

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.



Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 660 350
No. of Characters: 3394 1500
No. of Different Words: 265 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.069 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.142 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.088 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 240 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 178 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 138 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 99 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.02 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.468 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5