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.
Dr Karp puts forth the argument that children in Tertia island are reared by their biological parents and not the whole village based on his interview with these children. He also makes the conclusion that the observation-centered method is wrong, based on the previous conclusion. This argument is spurious from a long range and is in no way supported by the evidence that he provided. To corroborate his argument, he will need to provide supporting evidence for the following issues.
Firstly, Dr Karp assumes that the way of child-rearing in Tertia 20 years ago are same as the conditions today. It may be that the civilization and way of life in this island, as well as the way a child is raised has shifted from a communal way of life to an individual-centered culture than it was 20 years ago. In the case that has happened, it becomes impossible to disprove a research made 20 years ago using a research made in a different environmental condition. To strengthen this argument, Dr Karp will have to provide evidence to prove that the way of life of Tertians today is the same as it was 20 years ago.
Also, Dr Karp's conclusion relies on the assumption that children mostly talk about the person who raised them than the person who did not. It is quite possible that the interview was structured in a way that asked more questions about the person who raised the children. Further evidence is also needed to show that the questions asked during the interview werre centered around child-rearing, instead of asking them about their parents.
Similarly, it is important to ask if the sample of children interview represents the entire population of children on Tertia. It is quite possible that the interview was centered on children of a certain age who spend more time with their biological parents than with others, and therefore talk about them the most. It is also possible that the sample size is skewed towards a section of Tertia Island whose culture is different from the other parts. For the argument to be valid, Dr Karp must prove that his sample is representative of the entire population of Tertia, and is also large enough to base the conclusion on.
The argument in its current form is untenable and invalid. However, if Dr Karp is able to provide evidence to show that his sample is representative, it becomes possible to evaluate the validity of his argument and maybe accept it as valid.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 418 350
No. of Characters: 1959 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.522 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.687 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.794 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 132 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.277 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.351 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.612 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.188 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 272, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...out the person who raised the children. Further evidence is also needed to show that th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, may, similarly, so, then, therefore, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2005.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 418.0 441.139720559 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.7966507177 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85561467159 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.423444976077 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 630.9 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.3561772784 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.941176471 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5882352941 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.17647058824 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.222568987741 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0759330562561 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0645405061236 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118149116569 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.050099930799 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.