Dr. Karp contents that interview-centered method helps to establish a more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions in island cultures. His contention is based on the interview centered approach used by his graduates and him in order to understand about the child rearing tradition in Tertia. He found that children in Tertia talk more about their biological parents than any other adults. This was contrary to the conclusion of Dr. field where he had concluded on the basis of his observation that children were reared by an entire village rather than by their biological parents. Although this argument seems coherent at first glance; However, upon scrutiny, one can fathom that it is based on flawed assumptions and premises.
The most glaring error is that Dr Karp is comparing his observation to a study which was conducted twenty years ago. In such a long time a lot of cultural, demographic, economic, political changes may have taken place. May be 20 years ago the whole village was actually involved in rearing a child as they had more time. However, in the 20 years because of changes like people living in nuclear families, families moving to big cities, the culture of the place might have got changed. Due to which the child rearing ways might have got changed. Hence, one fathom that this argument is based on faulty assumption.
Secondly, no information has been provided regarding the sample size on which the interviews were conducted. Until such interviews are not conducted on a proper sample size, the reliability of the results cannot be considered. Hence, owing to lack of information regarding the sample size on cannot conclude that Dr. Field’s observation was wrong.
Even if we assume that no cultural changes actually took place in last 20 years and the sample size of population on which the interviews were conducted was appropriate, one cannot deny the fact that Dr. Karp has based his conclusion without comparing the results of different methods of gathering information. Without any substantial data depicting the result of different methods of gathering data one cannot conclude that interview-centered method helps to establish a more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions.
Evidently, the argument is not very reliable. In order to ensure that the argument can be accepted by the reader Dr Karp needs to provide information regarding the sample size on which interviews were conducted. He needs to take into consideration the time gap of 20 years and then come up with a conclusion.
Essay evaluation report
sample arguments:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-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: 19 15
No. of Words: 413 350
No. of Characters: 2091 1500
No. of Different Words: 197 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.508 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.063 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.879 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 148 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.469 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.526 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.32 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.558 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.148 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 425, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y other adults. This was contrary to the conclusion of Dr. field where he had co...
^^
Line 1, column 463, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he conclusion of Dr. field where he had concluded on the basis of his observatio...
^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s and then come up with a conclusion.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, hence, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2144.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 413.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19128329298 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97803499565 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489104116223 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 663.3 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.9767267883 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.842105263 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7368421053 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.94736842105 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.256042116498 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0761224822684 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0917425986063 0.0701772020484 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12743177112 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101699565082 0.0628817314937 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.