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.
The recommendation is well presented that some scientists suggest that to conduct interview-centered research to gain more valid information about the child-rearing practices in the Tertain village. Astonishingly as the argument may sound, scrutiny reveals its validity suffers from the failures of addressing several crucial questions, which, if proved reasonable, will cast doubt on the suggestion. Therefore, we are inquiring more information to answer these questions and better evaluate the advice.
To begin with, though two research has different conclusions, we cannot simply arrive at the conclusion that the previous study using an observation-centered approach is problematic. We have to know are there any significant changes have happened in terms of the way of rearing children between the two studies? We cannot rule out a possibility that both arguments are accurate that with the development of the local economy, the household became capable enough to raise their own children during Dr. Karp’s visit. Moreover, maybe due to the interactions with the outside world, Tertians have learned that the parent-raising approach, which assigns priority to family interactions, is better for children’s mental health. Therefore, if the further evidence demonstrates that the measure of rearing the youth has altered during the past 20 years, the recommendation is open to doubt, because the previous study with a different research approach could also be correct.
Even though we concede there was no change in the way of rearing, we also need to address questions about the latter’s interpretation. To start with, Dr. Karp seems to attributes talking more about biological parents to the parent-rearing approach, but this assumption may not be held in reality. Therefore, we need to figure out the real meaning of this finding. In contrast to the original understanding, children could be inclined to talk about their parents just because the youth are isolated and are raised by the village as a whole. Thus, they are missing their parents. If the answer supports this hypothesis, the advice is rendered questionable, because the interview-centered method fails to explore the true feelings of the interviewees.
Finally, we cannot turn a blind eye to other drawbacks of the interview measure to make a comprehensive assessment: is there any significant disadvantages of this approach, which may give rise to the collapse of the research? On the one hand, compared to the observation method, an interview could be more expensive and inconvenient, since it requires more interviewers and has to design questions. On the other hand, the quality of the interview research mainly hinges on the content of talks, which may bias the final conclusions, because respondents may intentionally or unintentionally hind something from the researchers. If these drawbacks are reasonable, the advice will be weakened.
To summarize, as we have manifested above, the writer is too precipitous to reach the conclusion that the interview-centered approach could generate more accurate results. To carefully compare these two methods, we need to trace the development of the rearing way in the village, find out the real meaning of children, and take account of other factors that could influence the choice of research methods.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- not exactly
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
sample arguments:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 515 350
No. of Characters: 2745 1500
No. of Different Words: 258 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.764 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.33 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.154 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 203 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 170 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 118 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 75 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.027 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.523 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.141 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 174, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'attribute'.
Suggestion: attribute
...ation. To start with, Dr. Karp seems to attributes talking more about biological parents t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, as to, in contrast, in contrast to, to begin with, to start with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2838.0 2260.96107784 126% => OK
No of words: 515.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51067961165 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.763781212 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30117417992 2.78398813304 119% => OK
Unique words: 268.0 204.123752495 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520388349515 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 864.9 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.241973696 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.9 119.503703932 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.45 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
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: 0.124317909617 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0371173211706 0.0743258471296 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0379527776522 0.0701772020484 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0664731831268 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0426716723531 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.3799401198 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 12.5979740519 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 98.500998004 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.