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 tha | TOEFL IELTS GMAT GRE SAT ACT PTE ESL

Essay topics:

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.

Dr. Karp argued that since the conclusions of his study contradict those of Dr. Field, the observation-centered approach employed in the study of Field is invalid. Unfortunately, Karp overlooked factors such as sampling method and time. His statement is flawed because it assumes that Field’s study represents all studies that adopted the observation-centered approach. Karp also hypothesizes, without providing any evidence, that since the conclusions of the two studies are different, Field’s study must be incorrect.
Field employed the observation-centered approach to observe children, and Field concluded from his observations that children in Tertia are reared by a village rather than by their biological parents. Karp argued that since the Field’s study made the wrong conclusion, the observation-centered approached must be invalid. However, Field’s study does not represent all the studies that have employed the observation-centered approach. If Karp can review more literature and cite other authors who have criticized the observation-centered approach, Karp would make a more cogent argument. Until then, incontruities between Karp’s study and Field’s study do not signify that Field’s research approach is invalid.
Furthermore, Karp believed that his interviews can represent the population of Tertia. However, Karp has not provided more details for his interviews. Since Karp mentioned that he interviewed residents of a group of islands, including inhabitants of Tertia, it is possible that Karp interviewed just one child in Tertia and decided that the response of that child can represent all the children in Tertia. Karp should provide more details, such as the demographic information of the respondents and the sampling method used to select resopndents for the interviews. If Karp has interviewed every single person in Tertia and arrived at a conclusion that differs from Field’s conclusion, Karp’s conclusion would be more persuasive since he actually asked every person and acquired the response from each person.
Finally, Field’s study and Karp’s study were conducted 20 years apart. Nothing remains the same forever, and child-rearing methods in Tertia might have changed over the course of 20 years. Assuming that Karp only interviewed children, Karp’s conclusion might have been applicable for contemporary children in Tertia, but not for children in Tertia in 20 years ago. Therefore, Karp’s claim that Field’s conclusions are invalid is an overstatement because it assumes that the child-rearing method in Tertia has remianed the same over the past 20 years. Karp should provide more evidence to corroborate his ideas, such as interviews with adults who also believe that children in Tertia are reared by their parents instead of by the whole village.
In conclusion, Karp indicated that since Field’s conclusions are invalid, Field’s approach, namely the observation-centered approach, is invalid. Nevertheless, Karp mistakenly believed that Field’s research can represent all studies that employed the observation-centered approach, but has not cited other authors who agree with him. In addition, Karp is certain that his discoveries are correct and those of Karp are incorrect, but Karp has not provided any evidence to support his claim nor sufficient information to prove that his own research methods are impeccable . Since Karp has not provided any evidence to support his claims, his beliefs are ultimately flawed.

Votes

This essay topic by users

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

>>> More users practiced this topic >>>

Essay Categories

GMAT/GRE Argument Task

Essays by user Mateo Chen :

>>> more essays by the user >>>

Write an essay by this topic

Comments

Essay evaluations by e-grader

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 812, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...acquired the response from each person. Finally, Field’s study and Karp’s study ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 570, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... his own research methods are impeccable . Since Karp has not provided any evidenc...
^^
Line 5, column 672, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ims, his beliefs are ultimately flawed.
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, furthermore, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, in addition, in conclusion, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 13.6137724551 191% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2980.0 2260.96107784 132% => OK
No of words: 521.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.7197696737 5.12650576532 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77759609229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34676741949 2.78398813304 120% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.408829174664 0.468620217663 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 876.6 705.55239521 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6838043609 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.565217391 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.652173913 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73913043478 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 15.0 4.67664670659 321% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252858606546 0.218282227539 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0911176850418 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0592128165392 0.0701772020484 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156571233133 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0424747768901 0.0628817314937 68% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 12.5979740519 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.9071856287 143% => 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.

Essay evaluations by e-grader

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, furthermore, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, in addition, in conclusion, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments