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
The argument about the studying the culture via observation-centered approach versus studying that via interview-based approach, while might be true in some cases, fails to give enough evidences for its consideration. the argument assumes following facts that may not be true always.
First, the argument assumes that, children talking more about their biological parents in interview meant, they were being raised only by their biological parents and not by the whole village. This claim is unwarranted as there might be the cases where children talk more about their parents because they spend more time with their parents, or some biological parents might be more influential. Even after this, there might be an important part played by other villagers in the rendering of the children.
Besides this, the argument also assumes that a group of children interviewed from all the islands may accurately represent the on-ground reality of the culture in Tertia. This might not be true always as the children were interviewed from the group of islands having possibly different cultures and the prevalent culture in few of the other islands of the group may misrepresent the culture in Tertia specifically. Moreover, the age group of interviewed children is not mentioned. There might be a possibility where, the children are initially raised by their biological parents but are later rendered by whole village.
Finally, the argument also states that the overall observation centered research technique is inefficient without mentioning any details about Dr. Karp's research. It might be possible that the observations done by Dr. Karp were very specific and done on one community of Tertia and then extrapolated. There might be a chance that Dr. Karp's research findings could be flawed but this does not call for the claim that observation-based research method in inaccurate.
to sum up, the argument presents some unwarranted assumptions and lacks some rigid evidence to base its argument upon. More in-depth research results and details about the interviewees could have helped to arrive at the mentioned conclusion.
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 58
- People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences 50
- People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences 66
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the wellbeingof the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe thatthe only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is tomake as muc 16
- 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 andconcluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire villagerat 43
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1759 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.282 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.871 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.615 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.643 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.769 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.382 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.667 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 219, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...enough evidences for its consideration. the argument assumes following facts that m...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: To
...based research method in inaccurate. to sum up, the argument presents some unwa...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, first, if, may, moreover, so, then, while, in some cases, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1801.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 333.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40840840841 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93482056186 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501501501502 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 549.0 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0376011848 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.642857143 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7857142857 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.85714285714 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.125464620262 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0515485232112 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439630762207 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0641122162964 0.128457276422 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0520405033941 0.0628817314937 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.