In this argument, the author claims that Dr. Field’s conclusion about the Tertian village culture is invalid and the observation-centered method used by Dr. Field in his survey is also invalid. In addition, the interview-centered approach used by the graduate students on the author's team to address the issue of child-rearing traditions in Tertian villages would have provided more accurate results and the method could be widely applied in other island cultures. At first glance, we cannot deny the rationality of it to a certain extent, but further reflection reveals that it neglects some substantial concerns that should be addressed in the argument.
The immediate question is whether or not the author’s conclusions on the rearing of the tertia island children using the interview-centered approach are inconsistent with Dr. field’s conclusions using the observation-centered approach necessarily proves that the author’s conclusion is valid and Dr. field’s conclusion is invalid. The argument depends on the assumption that the conclusions of the past twenty years must be less valid than those of the present. However, the argument fails to provide any evidence to support this assumption. Perhaps the conclusion Dr. field reached twenty years ago was correct and valid at the time. Thus, to strengthen the argument that Dr. field’s conclusion is invalid, the authors would also need to argue that child rearing patterns in the tertia islands twenty years earlier were contrary to Dr. field’s findings.
Additionally, for the claim that the interview-centered method to studying cultures is more accurate than the observation-centered approach. the author unfairly assumes that, each member of the author team ensures that the results obtained using the interview-centered method are accurate and objective. However, the author does not give an account of the number of people interviewed or the scope of the interviews, nor can he guarantee the veracity of the results. Perhaps the children interviewed did not want everyone to know that their biological parents had failed in their rearing responsibilities and thus gave untrue information. Thus, to strengthen the argument that interview-centered method to studying cultures is more accurate, the author needs to explain the exact number of people interviewed, the scope of the sample, and other ways to verify the truth of the interviewees’ statements.
Furthermore, the author implies that the interview-centered method can be implemented in other island cultures. The underlying assumption of this argument is all island cultures. Each island’s culture can be accurately and validly concluded using the interview-centered method. However, the argument fails to provide any evidence to support this assumption. Perhaps children on other islands are reluctant to be interviewed, and even if they are, they are unwilling to tell the real information. So, in order to get the most accurate results in the most effective way, we should adopt different survey methods according to the actual situation of children in each island, instead of rigidly applying the interview-centered method to each island culture.
In conclusion, this argument is not convincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author would have to provide more evidence such as the validity of the Dr. Field’s conclusion twenty years ago, the design of the author’s interview-centered method study, and the specific situation for the surrounding islands. If the argument had included the given factor discussed above, it would have been more insightful and logically acceptable.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 554 350
No. of Characters: 3000 1500
No. of Different Words: 229 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.852 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.415 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.284 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 237 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 186 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 127 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.381 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.95 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.349 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.546 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.102 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 27, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
... argument. The immediate question is whether or not the author’s conclusions on the rearing...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 142, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...than the observation-centered approach. the author unfairly assumes that, each memb...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, then, thus, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3087.0 2260.96107784 137% => OK
No of words: 554.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57220216606 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85151570047 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38649374302 2.78398813304 122% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 204.123752495 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.43321299639 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 921.6 705.55239521 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.2444089244 57.8364921388 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.318181818 119.503703932 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.31818181818 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160843155875 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518754601008 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0613573381558 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0952651512945 0.128457276422 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0614312211192 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 14.3799401198 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.9071856287 151% => 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.