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 of the argument, Dr. Karp uses the fact that the children belonging to a group of islands, including Tertia, spent more time talking about their parents rather than talking about other adults of the society as an evidence to state that his methods of research, ie. interview was the better in comparison to observation: the research methodology applied by Dr. Field. In addition to that, he also claims that Dr. Filed's research was an invalid one. However, in arguing so, he makes several assumptions that are based on shaky grounds which consequently makes the conclusions of Dr. Karp dubious.
Firstly, Dr. Karp presumes that the rearing of children presently, and the culture and traditions of Terita is consistent with how things were 20 years ago. Dr. Karp doesn't consider the fact that in the time period of two decades, multiple features of the village including the culture might have evolved in Tertia which might have lead to the possibility of disparity in the conclusion of their research. It is probable that while today, the biological parents on Tertia reared their offsprings, 20 years ago, when Dr. Field conducted his research, children were actually reared by the entire community rather than just their own biological parents. If Dr. Karp had provided evidence stating that what the children said in the interview conducted by the research team also applied for children 20 years ago, the anthropologist's argument would have been more plausible.
Furthermore, by comparing the results of research on Tertia alone, with results of a group of islands including Tertia, a hasty generalization has been made. No specific evidence has been provided that states that the culture and tradition of Tertia and the group of Islands are exactly the same. If it were to be found that while in the group of islands, children are reared by their parents only but in Tertia, children are reared by an entire village, the conclusion that Dr. Karp has come to would be on shaky grounds. Dr. Karp should have mentioned or considered that the result of research concerning rearing might be different than what he found as Tertia is just a part of the group of islands, not the island itself. Had there been such evidence included in his article, his argument would seem more likely to be acceptable.
Moreover, Dr. Karp makes a hasty generalization by concluding that interview is a superior method or research rather than observation just based on the comparison of mere two experiments. Even if Dr. Karp's conclusion were true and Dr. Field's were faulty, that one case cannot be used to stereotype observation as an inferior research methodology. Had Dr. Karp provided more evidence regarding the significantly large number of cases where observation had yield faulty result and interview hadn't, the argument of Dr. Karp would have been strengthened. However, such evidence is nowhere to be seen, leaving Dr. Karp's conclusion: Interview is a much more accurate approach non-persuasive.
In the limelight of all these missing evidence, though Dr. Karp has attempted to provide a potentially plausible argument, to come to the conclusion that Dr. Fields finding was errant and Interview is a superior method of research in comparison to Observation seems unreliable.
- 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 82
- The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In de 83
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In 50
- The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend.Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom w 85
- Claim Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system Reason Laws cannot change what is in people s hearts or minds Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason 88
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 540 350
No. of Characters: 2691 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.821 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.983 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.733 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 198 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 156 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.765 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.66 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.706 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.398 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.605 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.161 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 166, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... how things were 20 years ago. Dr. Karp doesnt consider the fact that in the time peri...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 813, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'anthropologists'' or 'anthropologist's'?
Suggestion: anthropologists'; anthropologist's
... applied for children 20 years ago, the anthropologists argument would have been more plausible...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 634, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...h concerning rearing might be different than what he found as Tertia is just a part ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 489, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hadn't
...n had yield faulty result and interview hadnt, the argument of Dr. Karp would have be...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, then, while, in addition, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2744.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 538.0 441.139720559 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10037174721 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81610080973 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80004876302 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.420074349442 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 830.7 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.6704130661 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.444444444 119.503703932 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.8888888889 23.324526521 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 5.70786347227 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.34448708415 0.218282227539 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123225881671 0.0743258471296 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593895370317 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202340054059 0.128457276422 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518548181901 0.0628817314937 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => 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.