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 argument is an article written by Dr. Karp where he concludes that his interview centered method is much more accurate to predict the child-rearing traditions of Tertia Island compared to that of predicted by an observation based method carried out by Dr. Field two decades ago. To bolster Dr. Karp's argument, he cites a list number of assumptions, however, these are flawed with lack of specific evidence. Unless providing these evidences to substantiate the claims of Dr. Karp, the argument is susceptible to debate.
To begin, according to the argument the time gap between Dr. Karp's observation and Dr. Field's observation is twenty years. Since two decades is a remarkable time span, any major changes in Tertia people can be occurred. So, the arguer needs to explicitly cite what the specific changes in Tertia community did happen between this twenty years period.
Secondly, As the Dr. Karp's observation take interview from the children of group of islands including Tertia, the author of the argument needs to clarify how many children of Tertia Island were interviewed in Dr. Karp's interview centered technique, and what the actual proportion of these Tertia children among the entire group of children interviewed from the children of group of islands is. . If none of children of Tertia community is interviewed in Dr. karp's investigation, and other children from different islands response much more about their biological parents rather than other adults in their village, it will not focus the actual child-rearing pattern of Tertia children. So, before making a generalized child-rearing pattern for all the children entire islands community, the author must include the authentic evidence that all the islands are equally interviewed.
Thirdly, in this argument, Dr Karp assumes that the interviews taken by his graduate students are authentic and reliable. Since his existence during the interview is not clearly stated in the argument, how does he aver the transparency of his team mates if he is not present there? The students who conducted the interview may bias the statement, and declare that the children are more reared by their parents. Thus, to strengthen Dr. Karp's claim that his interview centered method is more effective, he needs clarify the reliability of the information that the interviews declare.
To sum up, the argument is unpersuasive and needs more clarification on the above mentioned issues. If the author provide evidences that explicitly buttress the above mentioned unwarranted assumptions, the conclusion that the author states can be more strengthened.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- not exactly
argument 3 -- not OK
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 412 350
No. of Characters: 2157 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.505 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.235 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.812 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 176 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.467 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.027 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.733 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.362 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.649 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.181 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Thank you for your kind
Thank you for your kind evaluation.
In sample
argument 3 -- also need to learn more about the interview questions that Dr. Karp’s team used. What exactly did they ask?
In my essay, argument-3,
I questioned to the reliability of the interview results that is declared by Dr. Karp's graduate students, since it was not mentioned in the argument that whether he was present or not during the interview.
It is not clear to me why the argument is not correct.
Does not it imply that what exactly they (students) asked?
If you read both carefully,
If you read both carefully,
'What exactly did they ask?' is not equal to 'whether the interviews taken by his graduate students are authentic and reliable.'
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 395, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...om the children of group of islands is. . If none of children of Tertia community...
^
Line 5, column 514, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'islands'' or 'island's'?
Suggestion: islands'; island's
...tion, and other children from different islands response much more about their biologic...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2204.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 412.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34951456311 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50530610838 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8811687326 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473300970874 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 671.4 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => 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: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.9393813878 57.8364921388 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.933333333 119.503703932 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4666666667 23.324526521 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.46666666667 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.329019845195 0.218282227539 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103968582441 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.09426242578 0.0701772020484 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164628706331 0.128457276422 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106477349085 0.0628817314937 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.