The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author has stated about the life of children in Tertia with regard to their upbringing. He has also mentioned about a former anthropologist's work and has degraded his methodology of studying culture with a note of renovation in the approach that he claims to become more successful. The two major flaws in his statement is that he has not substantiated his conclusion about the new methodology that he aims to follow nor has he given a brief insight about the reasons for rejecting the former author's work. Hence I stand against his claims that is being presented with vague and irrational statements. The reasons and evidences for disagreeing will be mentioned in the following paragraphs.
Firstly, the author has stated that his research is based on his interviews with the children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia. Clearly, we are left suspended without any evidence claiming that the children were from Tertia or not which opens room for more such doubts. Also, he has mentioned that the children spends more time in thinking about their biological parents. This again leaves voids in actual realization of the culture, that is, the readers are left in an oblivion. What exactly the children think about their parents ? With what reason the author claims that these children are from the Tertian culture ? are some definite questions that pops up to a reader.
Secondly, the author has degraded the inveterate observation-centered approach of his peer based on a research that was recorded two decades ago. This is in-sensual, since two decade is a very long time to base it as a proof to discard a methodology. There might have been prolific changes in the Tertian culture in the past two decades which the author has failed to analyze and hence is it highly bleak to claim his methodology to be superior.
To conclude, though the author has given hopes for the new methodology in a disparate discipline of study, his lack of rationalizing his claims portrays the statements to be nonintellectual. Hence I disgree with his claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 512, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... for rejecting the former authors work. Hence I stand against his claims that is bein...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 640, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Are
...children are from the Tertian culture ? are some definite questions that pops up to...
^^^
Line 5, column 101, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'research'.
Suggestion: research
...-centered approach of his peer based on a research that was recorded two decades ago. This...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 177, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'decade' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'decades'.
Suggestion: decades
...ades ago. This is in-sensual, since two decade is a very long time to base it as a pro...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 193, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... the statements to be nonintellectual. Hence I disgree with his claim.
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'if', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'with regard to']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.215053763441 0.25644967241 84% => OK
Verbs: 0.19623655914 0.15541462614 126% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0725806451613 0.0836205057962 87% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0403225806452 0.0520304965353 77% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0672043010753 0.0272364105082 247% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.137096774194 0.125424944231 109% => OK
Participles: 0.0698924731183 0.0416121511921 168% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.85685227157 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0295698924731 0.026700313972 111% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.112903225806 0.113004496875 100% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00537634408602 0.0255425247493 21% => Some modal verbs wanted.
WH_determiners: 0.0241935483871 0.0127820249294 189% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2072.0 2731.13054187 76% => OK
No of words: 348.0 446.07635468 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.95402298851 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.341954022989 0.378187486979 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.255747126437 0.287650121315 89% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.186781609195 0.208842608468 89% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.114942528736 0.135150697306 85% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85685227157 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.469332199767 107% => OK
Word variations: 52.2813377942 52.1807786196 100% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 20.039408867 85% => OK
Sentence length: 20.4705882353 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4789031262 57.7814097925 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.882352941 141.986410481 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4705882353 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.529411764706 0.724660767414 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 46.045300879 51.9672348444 89% => OK
Elegance: 1.38938053097 1.8405768891 75% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.272711073604 0.441005458295 62% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.13384108983 0.135418324435 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.100807796138 0.0829849096947 121% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.546672502345 0.58762219726 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.175704396375 0.147661913831 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120025140438 0.193483328276 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607847130261 0.0970749176394 63% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.42111578703 0.42659136922 99% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0838265869883 0.0774707102158 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1916967373 0.312017818177 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0557419238256 0.0698173142475 80% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.33743842365 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 3.0 6.46551724138 46% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 11.0 14.657635468 75% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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: This is not the final score. 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.