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 argument presented by this author about the chid-rearing of Tertia fails to logically establish the basis of the argument itself by overestimating the validity of the author's own study with respect to Dr. Field's and making unfounded assumptions. Throughout the passage, the author fails to acknowledge several important factors concerning the study he conducted as well as Dr. Field's. In order to strengthen the argument, the author would need to adress the confouding variables of his own study and discuss concrete reasons other than his own personal opinion about Dr. Field's study.
Throughout the entire passage, the author does not go in depth to disucussing the evidence provided in his own interview-based study about the children of Tertia. Was the sample size ample enough to represent the entirety of the population? Were the questions during the interview presented in an unbiased fashion? If the children were coherced with questions from the interviewer that prompted discussion about their biological parents or probed for answers about their families, then it is of no suprise that the child would spend more time discussing their biological parents over other adults in the village. Similarly, if the children were asked questions about their neighbors or friends, it makes logical sense that the conversation would digress to persons other than the child's biological parents. These are only a few factors, none of which were presented in the argument, that may invalidate a study's conclusion. In order to strengthen the argument, the author would have to adress all of these key issues about his own study.
During the argument the author not only fails to prove the results of his own study, but also questions the results of Dr. Field's study in shallow depth with an obvious bias. In order to prove that Dr. Field's study was truly inferior to that of his own, the author would need to adress the exact methods of observation that Dr. Field used. Also, as the author mentioned that Dr. Field's study was conducted twenty years ago, which is ample time for the community of Tertia to evolve and introduce a new variety of variables which must be considered for the author's study that may not have existed during Dr. Field's time. Furthermore, dilatory results when comparing the two studies is not strong enough to prove that the observation-based approach is inferior or superior to the interview-based approach of study. The author would need to proove that the two studies share similar grounds to be compared with another.
In conclusion, the argument fails to provide enough evidence in order for the reader to establish an actual position about child-rearing in Tertia. Although the author clearly states his viewpoint, he does not support his perspective on this issue not his study with indisputable evidence. In order to strengthen the his argument, the author would need to adress the confouding variables of his own study and Dr. Field's study for comparison. Until the author adresses these issues, his conclusion will be of little use for evaluating the community of Tertia or any other community with his methodolgy.
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.“According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in a 42
- Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling r 66
- 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 r 49
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 66
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and su 75
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: Throughout the passage, the author fails to acknowledge several important factors concerning the study he conducted as well as Dr. Field's. In order to strengthen the argument, the author would need to adress the confouding variables of his own study and discuss concrete reasons other than his own personal opinion about Dr. Field's study.
Error: adress Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: confouding Suggestion: confounding
Sentence: Throughout the entire passage, the author does not go in depth to disucussing the evidence provided in his own interview-based study about the children of Tertia.
Error: interview-based Suggestion: interview based
Error: disucussing Suggestion: discussing
Sentence: If the children were coherced with questions from the interviewer that prompted discussion about their biological parents or probed for answers about their families, then it is of no suprise that the child would spend more time discussing their biological parents over other adults in the village.
Error: coherced Suggestion: cohered
Error: suprise Suggestion: surprise
Sentence: In order to strengthen the argument, the author would have to adress all of these key issues about his own study.
Error: adress Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: In order to prove that Dr. Field's study was truly inferior to that of his own, the author would need to adress the exact methods of observation that Dr. Field used.
Error: adress Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: The author would need to proove that the two studies share similar grounds to be compared with another.
Error: proove Suggestion: prove
Sentence: In order to strengthen the his argument, the author would need to adress the confouding variables of his own study and Dr. Field's study for comparison.
Error: adress Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: confouding Suggestion: confounding
Sentence: Until the author adresses these issues, his conclusion will be of little use for evaluating the community of Tertia or any other community with his methodolgy.
Error: methodolgy Suggestion: methodology
Error: adresses Suggestion: addresses
---------------------
flaws:
the arguments are not exactly right on the point. Here goes a sample:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-10-outline
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 14 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 515 350
No. of Characters: 2606 1500
No. of Different Words: 209 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.764 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.06 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.692 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 189 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 146 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.611 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.591 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.399 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.547 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.177 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 549, Rule ID: PERSONAL_OPINION_FRIENDSHIP[1]
Message: Use simply 'opinion'.
Suggestion: opinion
...uss concrete reasons other than his own personal opinion about Dr. Fields study. Throughout t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 292, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unbiased fashion" with adverb for "unbiased"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...uestions during the interview presented in an unbiased fashion? If the children were coherced with que...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 314, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'his'?
Suggestion: the; his
...utable evidence. In order to strengthen the his argument, the author would need to adre...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, if, may, similarly, so, then, well, in conclusion, as well as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 81.0 55.5748502994 146% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2643.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 515.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13203883495 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.763781212 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74336292797 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.417475728155 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 800.1 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.22255489022 213% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.4937553463 57.8364921388 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.105263158 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1052631579 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.36842105263 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183832534451 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693040731786 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0476765116479 0.0701772020484 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128936931052 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0270625650499 0.0628817314937 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 98.500998004 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.