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
The author argues that Dr Field’s conclusion is invalid is based on many ambiguous assumptions and fails to mention several factors on basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, Dr. Field interviewed and learned about the children, twenty years ago. Many things might have been changed in the region of Tertia. Moreover, comparing the results from the older results doesn’t take into account the evolution of the society in the region.
Secondly, both the conclusion doesn’t give statically number about the number of children interview to come to conclusion. Furthermore, it also doesn’t mention the demographic from which the data was collected. It can be the case that Dr field observed the large number of children and came to the conclusion, while only a limited number of children were interviewed by the author’s team. Hence, it is very crucial to mention the number of children observed and interviewed before giving out a strong conclusion.
Thirdly, the type of observation by Dr. Field and type of question asked bby the author’s team are not mentioned exclusively. It also didn’t mention about the metric the research were looking to come to the conclusion.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to the above mentioned resaon and therfore implausible. It could be considerably strenghthen if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts to support the conclusion that the author studies were correct than the Dr Field research.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | dhruv7315 | 77 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Mayuresh08 | 64 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Dinesh4518 | 85 | view |
- The outermost layer of skin the epidermis produces a variety of growths in animal and bird species Because dinosaurs were reptiles and modern reptiles have scales and armor plates on their skin it was long assumed that dinosaurs had the same type of skin 81
- Fifteen years ago Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors Since that time Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes and overall student 52
- In 20 years there will be less pollution in the air than there is today 75
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student s field of study 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 t 66
- Men and women because of their inherent physical differences are not equally suited for many tasks 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 50
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 150, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...anged in the region of Tertia. Moreover, comparing the results from the older res...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1373.0 2260.96107784 61% => OK
No of words: 260.0 441.139720559 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28076923077 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85641342126 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523076923077 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.8241030492 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0714285714 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5714285714 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 5.70786347227 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.142611432932 0.218282227539 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528836664974 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056205054327 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0823215109148 0.128457276422 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382924139834 0.0628817314937 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 98.500998004 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 150, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...anged in the region of Tertia. Moreover, comparing the results from the older res...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1373.0 2260.96107784 61% => OK
No of words: 260.0 441.139720559 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28076923077 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85641342126 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523076923077 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.8241030492 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0714285714 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5714285714 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 5.70786347227 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.142611432932 0.218282227539 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528836664974 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056205054327 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0823215109148 0.128457276422 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382924139834 0.0628817314937 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 98.500998004 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.