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.
In the argument given, it is concluded that the Dr Field's conclusion about Tertia culture is invalid this is based on the evidence that the Dr. Karp interviewed with children of Tertia and found the opposite of what Dr Field has concluded. However, before this is recommended the arguer needs to answer three questions.
Firstly, are the two methods comparable? Perhaps it is possible that during the observation method the child behaves differently than during the interview method. It might be possible that during interview method the child is more parents centric while with the observation method the child is reared by an entire village than the their own parents. Hence, unless more comparable evidence is not provided the conclusion remains flawed.
Secondly, how the interviewed centred method is performed? Perhaps it is possible that during interview the interviewer ask mostly the family or the parents’ centric questions that might lead to more involvement of parents while interviewing. Thus, the children takes more time talking about their parent rather than any adults in their village. For example, If it is asked about their family backgrounds then it might be leads children to talk about their parents only. Hence, without much statistical evidence the recommendation does not hold water.
Thirdly, it is prematurely assumed by the author that the observation method is invalid. Therefore question arises that which method is more reliable? Perhaps it is possible that the observation method might be the correct way of studying the culture of Tertia because, as the observation does not have any direct influence on the behaviour of the children. Whereas, it might be possible that Interviewed method is not the optimum method of studying the culture of the Tertia. Hence without no clear evidence is provided which method is more reliable the conclusion does not hold water.
In sum, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to various unwarranted assumption. Hence, if more clear evidence is provided then is possible to fully evaluate the feasibility of the argument.
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 18 15
No. of Words: 338 350
No. of Characters: 1736 1500
No. of Different Words: 147 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.288 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.136 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.663 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.778 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.537 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.513 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.091 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is invalid this is based on the evidence that the Dr. Karp interviewed with child...
^^
Line 2, column 328, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'their'?
Suggestion: the; their
...ild is reared by an entire village than the their own parents. Hence, unless more compara...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 90, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...that the observation method is invalid. Therefore question arises that which method is mo...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 359, 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.
...uence on the behaviour of the children. Whereas, it might be possible that Interviewed ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 479, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...of studying the culture of the Tertia. Hence without no clear evidence is provided w...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, then, therefore, third, thirdly, thus, whereas, while, for example, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1781.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 338.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26923076923 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74863535662 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467455621302 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 705.55239521 78% => 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: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.8746479427 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9444444444 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7777777778 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156973139522 0.218282227539 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0476517614077 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678019981976 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0885025987894 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0640573630653 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.