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.
In the article Dr. Karp proclaimed his interview based methodology superior and marked the observation centered research of Dr. Field as inadequate based on the child rearing culture in an island called Tertia. However, four pieces of evidence are specifically required to make further assessment that Dr. Karp had made.
Before anything else, an important fact is that the nature of people is changing constantly. For example, in our subcontinent, joint families were noticed in a high number just twenty years ago while just after one generation, there are only a few left because of increasing the number of micro families. Similarly, the nature and culture of the Tertia society may change in twenty years, as a result there seems to be contradictions in two studies conducted. So without the evidence of behavioral and cultural changes Dr. Karp can not define his method great and the observation method a flop.
In the second place, the author mentioned that the children who were interviewed are the inhabitants of the island group which includes Tertia but it is not clear that the children are specifically from the Tertia because they may be from other neighboring islands where they are rearing by their biological parents. So without the specific evidence of the residence of the children interviewed, the claim does not hold water.
Another important piece of evidence is needed regarding the questions that were asked during the interview session because the children may answer the questions which were only about their parents, not about the other elders. Based on this unclear method of interview, it’s farcical to claim the interview method as perfect.
Last but not the least, in the area of science, arts and research, it’s common that references from multiple experts are needed to establish a method perfect as well to diminish a method. But in this article there is no evidence regarding any reference of other experts supporting the interview method and bashing the observation method.
In conclusion, Dr. Field may spend many years in Tertia and observing the people closely for such a long time surely had made the better outcome than the interview method of Dr. Karp’s which may only be based on some short time interview guided by the graduate students. Unless the four pieces of evidence aforementioned are presented in a right manner, the proclamation of Dr. Karp is flawed, and on top of that, declaration of the observation method as invalid is utter insolent.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | dhruv7315 | 77 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Mayuresh08 | 64 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Dinesh4518 | 85 | view |
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 410 350
No. of Characters: 2046 1500
No. of Different Words: 197 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.5 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.99 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.639 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.189 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.786 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.358 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.671 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.073 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 11, column 336, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a right manner" with adverb for "right"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...f evidence aforementioned are presented in a right manner, the proclamation of Dr. Karp is flawed...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, regarding, second, similarly, so, well, while, for example, in conclusion, as a result, in the second place, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2106.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 410.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13658536585 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71633742283 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49756097561 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 654.3 705.55239521 93% => 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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.2969668327 57.8364921388 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.428571429 119.503703932 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.2857142857 23.324526521 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4285714286 5.70786347227 183% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248214110664 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829885384366 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0752753877144 0.0701772020484 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131535629169 0.128457276422 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0837105852661 0.0628817314937 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.3799401198 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.3550499002 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.