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.
In the author's argument, it is concluded that in order to derive accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method instead of using an observation-centered approach. The author draws this conclusion by citing the dispararity between the results of two different studies carried out by two anthropologists at different times and assumes that the second study is more accurate because it used a different approach from the first. However,before this recommendation can be fully evaluated, three questions need to be answered.
First of all, were the questions asked by Dr Karp during his interview in line with the study of Dr Field? Do the two studies have the same statement of purpose? Are the questions asked during he interview without bias? It is possible that the interview conducted by Dr Karp with the children raised an entirely different subject matter. Perhaps, he asked them to talk about their biological parents and they only did this by reiterating the stories the always heard from other villagers about their parents. It could be that the children did not even know their parents and only talked about the imaginations they had of them. Maybe the children did not even understand the questions asked by Dr. Karp and went on talking about a totally different thing. Moreover, it could be that the language spoken by the people of Tertia was not understood by Dr. Karp and then he interpreted a different thing. Hence, if any of the above scenerios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the author's argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, is the Tertian culture un-changable? Change they say, is the only constant thing. The author's assumes that because Dr. Field study happened 20 years ago, the culture then is still the same now. This may not be the case. It could be that when Dr. Field visited the island of Tertia, they were uncivilizied, but now, civilization may have gotten the best of them and they now see thing differently. Maybe they now had television where they could see how other islands and villages raised their children which made the whole villagers of Tertian come together to revise their culture. Perhaps,the study carried out by Dr. Field changed their approach to how they raised their children and that study may have been the catalyst that brought about a revision of the Tertian culture. Therefore, if the above is true, then the author's argument does not hold water.
Finally, if Dr. Karp's study had come first before Dr. Field's would it still be considered valid? Because Dr. Field study happened 20 years does not mean it is invalid, it could even be that Dr. Karp's interview was not systematically done. What if there were other studies that used the interview-centered method before Dr. Karp, involving errors and bias, would it still be considered accurate? Even if Dr. Field's study was invalid, that does not been the approach is wrong. It could be that Dr. Field didn't know how to use the approach or was still a new at using the approach.There could have been alot of other studies after Dr. Karp's that used Dr. Field's approach that includes more evidence and accurate measures better than Dr. Karp's. Without convincing answers to these questions, the author's argument is considered as flawed.
In conclusion, the author's argument as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author had provided more evidence, perhaps in form of a systematic research study, then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the author's recommendation to conduct future research on Tertian child-rearing practices via the interview-centered method rather than the observation-centered approach to obtain accurate information.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 632 350
No. of Characters: 3157 1500
No. of Different Words: 248 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.014 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.995 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.863 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 212 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 171 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 120 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.407 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.062 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.302 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.489 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 8, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
In the authors argument, it is concluded that in order...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 528, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , before
...fferent approach from the first. However,before this recommendation can be fully evalua...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 197, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'interviews'.
Suggestion: interviews
...pose? Are the questions asked during he interview without bias? It is possible that the i...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 983, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...merit, then the conclusion drawn in the authors argument is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 105, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'assume'.
Suggestion: assume
...is the only constant thing. The authors assumes that because Dr. Field study happened 2...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 600, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...ogether to revise their culture. Perhaps,the study carried out by Dr. Field changed ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 831, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...erefore, if the above is true, then the authors argument does not hold water. Finall...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 504, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ch is wrong. It could be that Dr. Field didnt know how to use the approach or was sti...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 580, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: There
...r was still a new at using the approach.There could have been alot of other studies a...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 719, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...udes more evidence and accurate measures better than Dr. Karps. Without convincin...
^^
Line 7, column 795, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...vincing answers to these questions, the authors argument is considered as flawed. In...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...idered as flawed. In conclusion, the authors argument as it stands now, is considera...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 288, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... to fully evaluate the viability of the authors recommendation to conduct future resear...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 406, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ctices via the interview-centered method rather than the observation-centered app...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, still, then, therefore, in conclusion, talking about, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 56.0 28.8173652695 194% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3218.0 2260.96107784 142% => OK
No of words: 628.0 441.139720559 142% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12420382166 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00598923014 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95730433177 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.415605095541 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 961.2 705.55239521 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.213200372 57.8364921388 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.928571429 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4285714286 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 14.0 5.25449101796 266% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 17.0 4.67664670659 364% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.301129647496 0.218282227539 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0751815959936 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593857735729 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155931602169 0.128457276422 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0281942529077 0.0628817314937 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.