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 stats that his interview-centered method more dependable than Dr. Field observation-centered method. However, this argument has some unwarrented assumptions and missing data which can invalidate Dr. Karp's conclution of higher accuracy over Dr. Field method.
The speaker failed to note that Dr. Field observed Tertia twenty years ago and comparing current and past data is not full proof evidence. For example, may be twenty year ago tertia has different child-rearing tradition because of isolation from rest of world. But now they have contact with rest of world and their child-rearing method changed due to outside influence. If this is the case, spearke's argument completely falls apart.
Moreover, talking is not accurate measure of knowing tradition and specificaly to child. And these children may not mature enough to answer intervie questions seriously. Conversely, Dr. Field was a well known anthropologist who have expertise to derive conclusion based on his observation. Therefore, if interview-centered method depended on immatured child for deriving conclusion, Dr. Karp argument becomes invalid.
Even if above two is false, interview essential data of interview method and observation method are missing. Later team only conducted interview with children from major villages of islands, whereas Dr. Field stayed longer in teria island to observe and involed with them. If this is the case, Dr. Karp's argument hold no position as this method did not cover adequant data, while Dr. Field has vast and relaible data to back up his case.
- An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition 33
- Those who see their ideas through, regardless of doubts or criticism others may express, are the ones who tend to leave a lasting legacy.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your re 58
- Some people believe today that everyone has a right to access to the Internet and that governments should provide this access for free Other people believe that access to the internet is not a right and should be paid for like other services Discuss both 78
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 50
- Some say that rich countries should help poor countries with trade health and education Do you agree or disagree Give reasons for your answer and include examples from your experience 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.6327345309 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 55.5748502994 49% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1333.0 2260.96107784 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 242.0 441.139720559 55% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.50826446281 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.56307096286 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03385998356 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 204.123752495 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.644628099174 0.468620217663 138% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 705.55239521 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.141088353 57.8364921388 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 102.538461538 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6153846154 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15384615385 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.250703069527 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0884123968929 0.0743258471296 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0699099642662 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155730492207 0.128457276422 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302758145704 0.0628817314937 48% => 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: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.