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
Dr. Karp fails to support his conclusion with concrete and clear examples on numerous instances. Therefore the argument certainly lacks validity.
Firstly, Dr.karp mentions interviewing a group of islands in which includes Tertia, Here he fails to mention the exact proportion of children from each island used to reach his conclusion. All we know, he could have interviewed a small number when compared with Dr.Field research who observed the children in Tertia and the practices they follow to rear the children. Hence, Dr.Karp's conclusion falls apart, although if Dr.Karp would have given more detail regarding the split and focus on each of the islands the conclusion could be strengthened, Nonetheless He stills has to provide irrefutable evidence regarding the children's honesty in responding to his questions.
Secondly, Talking and observation are fundamentally unrelated. Dr.Field observed the behavior of children and people in the village in their natural milieu before making any conclusions. Also, A myriad of details are missed when we are simply interviewing someone with directed questions, Therefore it may be partially warranted that observation is a better tool than talking vice-versa is definetely not true. Also, even if Dr.Karp is able to provide us with the specifics regarding the interview questions, it cannot be assumed that Dr. Fields' observation was not equally efficient. Therefore, the conclusion is heading downhill with this unwarranted assumption.
Thirdly, if children in Tertia specifically talked about their biological parents doesn't imply in any sense that children are not reared collectively by the people of the village. Dr.Karp misinterprets the fact, the situation could be that the biological parents did not pay enough attention to their kids because of their collective approach. Dr. Karp's leap provides a lot of room for assumptions, even if these assumptions are valid the conclusion lacks validity on numerous other factors.
Dr. Karp's conclusion failing on numerous occasions lacks validity, hence it is unwarranted
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 322 350
No. of Characters: 1718 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.236 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.335 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.897 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 134 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.345 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.597 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.129 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 98, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...d clear examples on numerous instances. Therefore the argument certainly lacks validity. ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 266, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Field
...ed a small number when compared with Dr.Field research who observed the children in T...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 379, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
... follow to rear the children. Hence, Dr.Karps conclusion falls apart, although if Dr....
^^^^^
Line 5, column 424, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
... conclusion falls apart, although if Dr.Karp would have given more detail regarding ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 67, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Field
...rvation are fundamentally unrelated. Dr.Field observed the behavior of children and p...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 429, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...s definetely not true. Also, even if Dr.Karp is able to provide us with the specific...
^^^^
Line 9, column 83, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...y talked about their biological parents doesnt imply in any sense that children are no...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 184, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...tively by the people of the village. Dr.Karp misinterprets the fact, the situation ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 212, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...village. Dr.Karp misinterprets the fact, the situation could be that the biologic...
^^
Line 11, column 92, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... lacks validity, hence it is unwarranted
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, may, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, third, thirdly, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1773.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 315.0 441.139720559 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.62857142857 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96962704851 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.587301587302 0.468620217663 125% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 66.6523496531 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.642857143 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.21428571429 5.70786347227 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
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: 0.263321015424 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0925077858119 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0650452003915 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129993214794 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0705810536394 0.0628817314937 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 12.5979740519 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.