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.”
The article written by Dr. Karp concluded that the children in Tertia were reared by their own biological parents. This conclusion was made on the premise that, through the interview-centered method, it was shown that the children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. However, the conclusion that was made is logically unsound since it is built on the premise of assumptions that are not wholly supported.
First and foremost, Dr. Karp failed to account for the fact that children raised twenty years ago may not necessarily be raised in the same conditions as compared to today. In fact, there could be a possibility whereby children were raised by an entire village twenty years ago and due to some changes in their lifestyle, children now are raised by their own biological parents. If that were the case, Dr. Karp’s statement whereby he dismissed Dr. Field’s conclusion and methodology will itself be false. Dr. Karp will need to provide evidences to show that the lifestyle of Tertia remained the same twenty years ago in order to strengthen his argument that Dr. Field’s conclusion and methodology is false. This evidence could be through research on other studies conducted during this time period on Tertia which demonstrates a shift or stagnation in the lifestyle. Otherwise, Dr. Karp could also try to recreate the research conducted by Dr. Field using the observation-method to make a conclusion about the lifestyle of town Tertia after twenty years.
Next, Dr. Karp assumed that just because he got a different conclusion, his interview-centered approach is reliable. He disproved the observation-centered approach because a different conclusion was obtained. However, the reason could be that his methodology was the faulty one instead. For instance, observation-centered approach could be more reliable, since the lifestyles and culture of the town is being observed and recorded. It is very visual and may be less disruptive to the lives of the people in Tertia town. On the other hand, the interview-centered approach may not necessarily be reliable, since there could be language barriers between the children and the interviewers. Nevertheless, we had no idea how both the observation and interview-centered approach was conducted and thus will not know which method is more reliable. Dr. Karp will need to provide the methodology they have used and some past studies or research that were conducted using similar methodology to disprove the observation-centered approach and validate the interview-centered approach.
Lastly, Dr. Karp assumed a direct correlation between children in Tertia talking about their biological parents and being raised by them. However, this was not supported by any evidence or facts. The children in Tertia could very well raised by the entire village but talked about their biological parents because they miss them due to the lack of affection. If that were the case, it may also disprove the interview-centered approach as being unreliable. Hence, more information on the interview with regards to the how it was conducted, the language used, the questions asked, and the answers provided are required to effectively evaluate the correlations and strengthen the argument.
In conclusion, the article written by Dr. Karp would be more convincing and cogent if more information with regards to the observation and interview-centered approaches used were provided, such as being supported by other studies using similar methodologies. In addition, Dr. Karp should also repeat the experiment conducted by Dr. Field to eliminate any doubts in his findings. With such further details and evidences, Dr. Karp will be able to support all of the generalizations the article put forth and strengthen his argument. In the absence of these evidences, we should be wary about accepting the truth of the argument’s conclusion.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly. check a sample:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-10-outline
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 621 350
the conclusion is too long.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 621 350
No. of Characters: 3249 1500
No. of Different Words: 234 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.992 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.232 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.181 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 228 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 187 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 135 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 87 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.885 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.777 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.326 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.514 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.172 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 514, Rule ID: THE_HOW[1]
Message: Did you mean 'how'?
Suggestion: how
...mation on the interview with regards to the how it was conducted, the language used, th...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 454, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ences, Dr. Karp will be able to support all of the generalizations the article put forth a...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, so, then, thus, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, talking about, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 40.0 19.6327345309 204% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.9520958084 162% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 11.1786427146 206% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3339.0 2260.96107784 148% => OK
No of words: 621.0 441.139720559 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3768115942 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.991980728 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29433022416 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.394524959742 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1019.7 705.55239521 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.838938159 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.423076923 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8846153846 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.88461538462 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264417524639 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0861194901878 0.0743258471296 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0818344831488 0.0701772020484 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159146850117 0.128457276422 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0878167613356 0.0628817314937 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.3799401198 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.