The author of the prompt has argued that an interview based method is superior to an observation based method in understanding child-rearing traditions in island based cultures. The author comes to this conclusion based on the fact that the children of Tertia talked a good amount about their biological parents which indicated to the author that the previous conclusion reached through the observation based method- that children were primarily raised by an entire village- is inaccurate. In assesing this argument, I would like to argue that the author has not necessarily proven his or her argument as he or she has made unnecessary assumptions in reaching the aforementioned conclusion, and have also failed to adress other important factors that undermine the validity of the conlusion.
In the first place, the author seems to assume that children talking about their biological parents is akin to the former being raised by the latter. Such an assumption is unwarranted for we simply do not know as to why the children talked a good deal about their biological parents. If anything, we cannot be sure of the exact reason unless and until we ask the children as to why they prefered talking about their biological parents over other things. Given that the author has not even provided us the nature of the conversations, we can very easily dismiss the overall conclusion that the author has reached based solely on the interviews.
In addition, the author does not seem to realize that the children in question may very well be talking about their biological parents since they have never seen or spent enough time with them in the first place. Indeed, is it not common for us to talk about that which we dearly miss? In fact, it seems that had the children talked about things other than their parents, we could have concluded they were reared by them; they would be talking about something else that they earn for. On the other hand, when they are primarily talking about their parents, it would seem that they were rasied by a village, and long to see and be in touch with their parents..
Finally, it is clear that if we are to get to the truth of the entire matter, the parents of the island need to interviewed as well; they simply need to be asked as to whether they were responsible for the upbringing of their children. The children in question may not remember their uprbinging and it seems hasty on the author's part to have simply conluded their parent-less upbrining without even interviewing the island's parents themselves. Given that author's negligence on this matter, we cannot take his overall argument for granted.
In sum, the author's argument is flawed at best. It could be the case that the interview based method is better, as the author argues. But, to reach this conclusion, he or she has made unwarranted assumptions and have also failed to take into other factors that determine the validity of the argument.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: In assesing this argument, I would like to argue that the author has not necessarily proven his or her argument as he or she has made unnecessary assumptions in reaching the aforementioned conclusion, and have also failed to adress other important factors that undermine the validity of the conlusion.
Error: adress Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: conlusion Suggestion: confusion
Error: assesing Suggestion: assessing
Sentence: If anything, we cannot be sure of the exact reason unless and until we ask the children as to why they prefered talking about their biological parents over other things.
Error: prefered Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: On the other hand, when they are primarily talking about their parents, it would seem that they were rasied by a village, and long to see and be in touch with their parents..
Error: rasied Suggestion: raised
Sentence: The children in question may not remember their uprbinging and it seems hasty on the author's part to have simply conluded their parent-less upbrining without even interviewing the island's parents themselves.
Error: uprbinging Suggestion: springing
Error: upbrining Suggestion: uprising
Error: conluded Suggestion: concluded
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
here goes the sample with the correct arguments:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/gre-argumentthe-following-appear…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: ? Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2397 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.775 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.524 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.046 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.393 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.62 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.256 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 659, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive dots
Suggestion: .
...o see and be in touch with their parents.. Finally, it is clear that if we are...
^^
Line 7, column 163, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...d as well; they simply need to be asked as to whether they were responsible for the upbringin...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ll argument for granted. In sum, the authors argument is flawed at best. It could be...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, may, so, well, as to, in addition, in fact, talking about, in the first place, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 69.0 28.8173652695 239% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2450.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88047808765 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59193278954 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424302788845 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 747.0 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 4.96107784431 242% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.7612096344 57.8364921388 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.117647059 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.5294117647 23.324526521 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.47058823529 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175251562824 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0637364805239 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518729728784 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10056495199 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0480891618208 0.0628817314937 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.62 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.