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 examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
Dr. Field's conclusion about the Tertian village using his observation-centered approach is invalid as compared to the interview-centered approach of the graduate students team of Dr. Karp. Dr. Karp has come to this conclusion after seeing the result of the recently conducted interview of the children from various islands including Tertia. However, the conclusion relies on various assumptions by Dr. Karp.
Firstly, Dr. Karp assumes that the children who were talking only about their biological parents are not reared by the entire village. This assumption is erratic on various aspects as Dr. Karp presumes that the question in the interview were of a diverse range but in reality they were all falling in a single category. There could be a possibility the children were talking about the biological parents as all the questions asked to them were concerned to them. If this argument holds water then Dr. Karp's argument is unwarranted.
Secondly, Dr. Karp's assumes that the interview-centered approach that his team of graduate team is currently using will be accurate in understanding the culture of the island. There could be a possibility that the interviewee does not reveal what the reality and given very spurious answers. The other outcome of the approach could be that all the people in the village don't want to reveal their culture to the world so the all the children will be trying to deceit the interviewer, which in turn will produce anomalous results and will put the interview-centered approach down the drain. If this argument hold merit then Dr. Karp's conclusions are conjectural.
Finally, Dr. Karp assumes there could not have been any changes in the culture of the island even after twenty years. The people in Tertia would have been evolving from the last twenty years, so the cultures that seemed conspicious in the people twenty years ago could have be eroded. There could have been a possibility that the people were tired of the researchers trying to understand their cultures and averred the constant pestering by them so started to act differently in front of them.
In conclusion, the above argument as it stands now is flawed. If Dr. Karp could provide more evidence that could support his conclusion that would help his case that the interview centered approach is valid and provides impecchable results.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 385 350
No. of Characters: 1933 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.43 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.021 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.848 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.062 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.732 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.812 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.379 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.611 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.134 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 464, 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.
...s asked to them were concerned to them. If this argument holds water then Dr. Karp...
^^
Line 5, column 371, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...d be that all the people in the village dont want to reveal their culture to the wor...
^^^^
Line 5, column 590, 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.
...rview-centered approach down the drain. If this argument hold merit then Dr. Karps...
^^
Line 7, column 275, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
... the people twenty years ago could have be eroded. There could have been a possibi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, in conclusion, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1968.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 384.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.125 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88645062702 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.455729166667 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 585.9 705.55239521 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.7875398416 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.0 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1875 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211584131725 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0823825274353 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520999768483 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12521477892 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0543270306353 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.