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.
There are several problems with the quick conclusion that Field's conclusion based on observation data is flawed, and the recommendation that future data be gathered by interview only is not effective.
First, the two researchers used different samples. Is Field's sample of Tertia itself representative of the islands as a whole, which Karp sampled? The assumption is made that it is, but we need to know if this is true. If there are differences, we need to know what those differences are and how the differences impact which adults the children spend time with. This would impact who the children spend time with and who the children talk about.
Second, Karp is showing deep favoritism for his own method by making such a strong assumption about FIeld's method and conclusion. Just because children talked about their parents more doesn't mean other adults didn't help raise them. Children in western society are deeply impacted by teachers, coaches, etc, and parallel relationships could exist in Tertia and the surrounding islands. What evidence is there that indicates that interview data should have stronger weight than observation data?
Finally, Karp is making a strong conclusion based on only one type of evidence. Neither Field's method or Karp's method is complete. Both interviews and observations, considered together, become complementary qualitative data that give a clearer picture of culture. We need to know where the observation and interview data support one another, and also where they seem to diverge, so the divergence can be further examined. Also, only children were interviewed. Children will have a natural affinity for their parents more than other adults. It is also necessary to interview adults, who are likely to look at the situation more objectively.
In summary, Karp is jumping to conclusions. Just because his method shed light on a different side of child-rearing, this doesn't indicate that Field's method, data, or conclusions are flawed. Karp should look to see where the two methods and dada work in concert to draw a more complete conclusion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
There are several problems with the quic...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 207, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...red by interview only is not effective. First, the two researchers used dif...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ith and who the children talk about. Second, Karp is showing deep favoritism ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 191, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...hildren talked about their parents more doesnt mean other adults didnt help raise them...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...r parents more doesnt mean other adults didnt help raise them. Children in western so...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 502, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... stronger weight than observation data? Finally, Karp is making a strong co...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 109, Rule ID: NEITHER_NOR[1]
Message: Use 'nor' with neither.
Suggestion: nor
...ype of evidence. Neither Fields method or Karps method is complete. Both intervi...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...k at the situation more objectively. In summary, Karp is jumping to conclusio...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 129, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...a different side of child-rearing, this doesnt indicate that Fields method, data, or c...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, look, second, so, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 55.5748502994 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1760.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 335.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25373134328 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81615174058 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.549253731343 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 538.2 705.55239521 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.3561978936 57.8364921388 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.75 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.95 5.70786347227 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 5.25449101796 171% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.116757492904 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0359159840054 0.0743258471296 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0291988795724 0.0701772020484 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.065419319961 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0251029897061 0.0628817314937 40% => 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: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.87 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => 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 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.