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 argument makes reference to two conclusions made by Dr. Field and Dr. Karp about village culture in Tertia. The argument stated here that Dr. Field’s conclusion about Terian culture does not hold true as children spoke more about their biological parents rather than other elders in the village is not very convincing. In my opinions the argument is based on faulty assumptions as following.
Firstly, can the visits made twenty years ago be still valid? What Dr. Field observed about Terian culture twenty years ago may not be true with Dr. Karp’s observations. Also the method which was used by Dr. Field during his time may not still be viable or successful option twenty years down the line when Dr. Karp visited the village to make his conclusions. Thus as both the visits to the village were made during different timelines Dr. Field’s conclusions cannot be termed invalid.
Another questions which pops up is can an observation centric approach made on group of children by Dr. Field be compared to Dr. Karp’s interview centric approach on a comparatively larger group of people from different villages? Dr. Field observations were purely based on children of Tertia. Whereas Dr. Karp made his conclusions based on a number op people from Different villages including Tertia. Thus as the results which were valid for many villages they cannot be justified for a single village of Tertia as given in Dr. Karp’s conclusion.
In conclusion if the above stated questions are justified then only the final conclusion to use interview centric approach instead of observation centric approach for deriving results for culture holds true.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 270 350
No. of Characters: 1356 1500
No. of Different Words: 132 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.054 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.022 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.543 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 104 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 71 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 47 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.359 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.583 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.441 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.655 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.171 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 176, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...true with Dr. Karp's observations. Also the method which was used by Dr. Field ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 367, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ed the village to make his conclusions. Thus as both the visits to the village were ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 300, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” 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.
...ere purely based on children of Tertia. Whereas Dr. Karp made his conclusions based on ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 408, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...om Different villages including Tertia. Thus as the results which were valid for man...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, may, so, still, then, thus, whereas, in conclusion, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 28.8173652695 24% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1415.0 2260.96107784 63% => OK
No of words: 270.0 441.139720559 61% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24074074074 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73443719555 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.503703703704 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 705.55239521 59% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5182782461 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.916666667 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 5.70786347227 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.316777165211 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139435249867 0.0743258471296 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0729298177314 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182901682818 0.128457276422 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.081296041835 0.0628817314937 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 98.500998004 59% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.