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 article (Dr. Karp) argues the conclusion that the children in Tertia village were raised by the entire village. He stated in his article that the conclusions of the initial anthropologist (Dr. Field) that visited the area were invalid and do not depict the original culture of the Tertian’s. At first glance, this might seems logical; however, his argument is flawed without substantial proof for conclusion.
First, the author assumes that what held true twenty years ago in the village of Tartia still holds at the time of research. Twenty years is enough time for the demography of a village to change. It might be that, twenty years ago the villagers were very friendly and helped each other. This might account for the children of the villagers mixing without worries. It can also be contended that some physical forces might have warranted the children staying close to their parents than anyone else in the village. Take for instance, maybe recently some contagious disease which can be contracted while mingling with members of the society exists. The result is that children are forced to stay glued to their biological family. If this is the case, there will definitely be a shift from the former to the latter. In a view to strengthen his argument, a survey of the people living in the village must be taken, were they group of friendly people twenty years ago? What are their behaviors towards children recently? Is there any contagious disease that might prevent children from mingling with other people recently? All these must be taken into consideration.
Secondly, the author concludes that since the children interviewed talked more about their parents, it means they stayed with their parents more. This might not be true. Children are attracted towards those who they like most, not necessarily those that bring them up. They are seldom attracted to those who buy them stuffs. In a particular survey, children tends to talk better and very good about those that buy them stuffs such as goodies, chocolates, clothes etc. If this is the case, they are more likely to talk excellently about their biological parents.
Logically, the result of a survey cannot be trusted. The author states that children from different Island and the Tertian Island were being questioned. What makes us know that the number of children interviewed in Tertia was an ample representation of the children in the village? It is possible that they might have interviewed minor in the village, in which case is a false representation of the children in Tertia. Who knows, five percent of the children might have been interviewed? If truly, the children in Tertia spend time with their parents, the question should be what is the total number of children interviewed? Finally, the author might have included other Island data in his observation in which case those not depicts that of Tartia’s entirely, fully knowing well that other Island is not Tertian Island and can only be used for a similar comparison. To strengthen this argument, the author must conduct a fresh interview in the village of Tertia with majority of the population (both children and parents) considered in the observation.
In conclusion, to make the author’s argument worth-while, the interview-centered method of his team of graduate students that resides in Tertia should be able to establish a much more accurate method of observation, looking into the statistical demography and historical overview of the village. Questionnaires also directed to members of the village both young and old will reveal the culture of the people.
- 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 79
- 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 54
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt 75
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa 50
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'well', 'while', 'for instance', 'in conclusion', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.223723723724 0.25644967241 87% => OK
Verbs: 0.163663663664 0.15541462614 105% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0690690690691 0.0836205057962 83% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0570570570571 0.0520304965353 110% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0405405405405 0.0272364105082 149% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.133633633634 0.125424944231 107% => OK
Participles: 0.048048048048 0.0416121511921 115% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.72893077878 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0195195195195 0.026700313972 73% => OK
Particles: 0.0015015015015 0.001811407834 83% => OK
Determiners: 0.123123123123 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.03003003003 0.0255425247493 118% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0195195195195 0.0127820249294 153% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3638.0 2731.13054187 133% => OK
No of words: 596.0 446.07635468 134% => OK
Chars per words: 6.10402684564 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94096258147 4.57801047555 108% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.372483221477 0.378187486979 98% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.268456375839 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.187919463087 0.208842608468 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.105704697987 0.135150697306 78% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72893077878 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 207.018472906 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451342281879 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 54.4634801304 52.1807786196 104% => OK
How many sentences: 30.0 20.039408867 150% => OK
Sentence length: 19.8666666667 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.8041201007 57.7814097925 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.266666667 141.986410481 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8666666667 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.566666666667 0.724660767414 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 46.7123042506 51.9672348444 90% => OK
Elegance: 1.55172413793 1.8405768891 84% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.407891355309 0.441005458295 92% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.152918791792 0.135418324435 113% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.122962784633 0.0829849096947 148% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.518181127799 0.58762219726 88% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.18762690918 0.147661913831 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139184010576 0.193483328276 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103649346493 0.0970749176394 107% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.409477862656 0.42659136922 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.113457679229 0.0774707102158 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.269396298524 0.312017818177 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116513105392 0.0698173142475 167% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.33743842365 144% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.82512315271 166% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.