In this memo, the author claims that future research on the subject mentioned in the memo should be conducted through the interview-based method. To support these assertions, the author points out that Dr. Field’s research method of observation-centered access so old dated that the interview-based method of recent research method is more reliable for supporting data. While some anthropologists also recommend this method for future research, the evidences provide little credible support for the memo’s recommendation, as discussed below.
To begin with, the memo must doubt whether is it reasonable to say old data can be refuted by recent data anytime. While some think observations held twenty years ago is obsolete and unreliable sources for this research, the other believes it is still viable to induce the conclusion of the research. How children in Tertia were reared need vast information such as the history of their nurtured environment since possibilities of social, environmental and cultural changes exists all the time.
Moreover, the memo needs to confirm the main sources that support Dr. Karp’s predilection of interview-based method. This fails to account for the fact that talking more about biological parents means being nurtured mainly by them. What if they have so strong bonds with their biological parents that they like to talk about them all the time even though they are reared by their entire village until now? In this case, it is unreliable to say they are nurtured mainly by their biological parents.
Thirdly, the memo needs to ask whether Dr. Karp’s interviews were aggregated mainly by the children in the island of Tertia. The key is checking how many percentage of the interview data were originated from the children in Tertia. If their interviews were possessing only 5% in the total data, then it is unlikely to say Dr. Karp’s interview is plausible since it is not depending on the subjects that needs to be researched.
In sum, the recommendation in the memo is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide better evidence that recent interview-based data is reliable enough to rebuke the observation-based interview held twenty years ago.
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
the arguments are not exactly right on the point. Here goes a sample:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-10-outline
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 355 350
No. of Characters: 1819 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.341 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.124 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.999 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.63 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.357 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.622 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.115 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... cultural changes exists all the time. Moreover, the memo needs to confirm the ...
^^^
Line 7, column 155, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun percentage seems to be countable; consider using: 'many percentages'.
Suggestion: many percentages
...land of Tertia. The key is checking how many percentage of the interview data were originated f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 258, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...children in Tertia. If their interviews were possessing only 5% in the total data, then it is u...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 376, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...'s interview is plausible since it is not depending on the subjects that needs to be resear...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, moreover, so, still, then, third, thirdly, while, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1891.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 355.0 441.139720559 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32676056338 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10880008503 2.78398813304 112% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.512676056338 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0860774193 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.066666667 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.46666666667 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13738428861 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0502798860108 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0500010047703 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0832402542637 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399936561675 0.0628817314937 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.