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 assumptions of Dr. Karp, an anthropologist are written in his memo about the past survey was false and his team of graduated students can gain accurate understanding of child-rearing in the island with the interview approach. The author ignored important information and some question should be answered in order to decide the recommendation is likely to have predicted results.
First, these two surveys are done in the different time and place conditions. So, it is entirely possible that Dr. Field’s survey was correct just for Tretia, not elsewhere, and at the twenty years ago, not now. In this way, comparing the results of these surveys is not logically, unless the author provides more information about condition in Tretia and other Island during twenty years ago. Although, the second survey reflects of Tretia at now, it is quite possible residents in Tertia have more responsible for rearing each other children in twenty years ago, while some conflicts or changing generations making the different conditions. Without considering this possible scenario, the author cannot justifiably conclude that a survey, which Dr. Field did, is false.
Second, Dr. Karp provides no assurance that a survey on which the argument depends is statistically reliable. The author does not provide information of the number of children, who participated in the interview. Perhaps the number of respondents was too low to ensure that the result of survey is right. In addition, if the respondents of island may are not representative of children in Tretia, the author cannot generalize the result of a survey to all children.
Third, the author relies on the fact that speaking more about parents is an indication children was reared by parents. However, it is not necessarily the case. Parents may teach some important traditional to the children, which affect them significantly, while children spend much time with other resident in this island.
In the fourth place, base on the fact that interviews can results accurate information, the author infers that a team of graduated students will establish a much more accurate understanding of the matter. The interview may is best procedure in this matter, while a graduated students might have not enough experience to use this approach. In addition, students can not speak with the native language and they misinterpret of residents’ answers, which affect the survey negatively. Since, the author ignore this effective factors, his conclusion can not be acceptable.
In sum, the argument is flawed rationally and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument the author must provide clear statistical information that Dr. Karp’s reflects all general population in Tretia. In order to evaluate better conclusion, Dr.Krap must give more evidence to supports graduated students can do interview correctly. Moreover, we need to know about the condition of Tertia and other islands.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-12 | Devendra Prasad Chalise | 16 | view |
| 2019-07-21 | Marcello | 89 | view |
| 2019-06-28 | kap | 50 | view |
| 2019-06-07 | Gh.Ne | 55 | view |
| 2018-10-22 | avinash2618 | 83 | view |
- Nowadays, food has become easier to prepare. Has this change improved the way people live? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 86
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws. 50
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants."Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have compla 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television, newspapers, magazines, and other media pay too much attention to the personal lives of famous people such as public figures and celebrities. Use specific reasons and details to explain you 70
- People work because they need money to live. What are some other reasons that people work?Discuss one or more of these reasons. Use specific examples and details to support your answer. 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 224, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'is the best'.
Suggestion: is the best
...anding of the matter. The interview may is best procedure in this matter, while a gradu...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 272, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Krap
...order to evaluate better conclusion, Dr.Krap must give more evidence to supports gra...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'third', 'while', 'as to', 'in addition']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.263157894737 0.25644967241 103% => OK
Verbs: 0.127819548872 0.15541462614 82% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0845864661654 0.0836205057962 101% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0695488721805 0.0520304965353 134% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0187969924812 0.0272364105082 69% => OK
Prepositions: 0.125939849624 0.125424944231 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0244360902256 0.0416121511921 59% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.97377756209 2.79052419416 107% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0187969924812 0.026700313972 70% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.114661654135 0.113004496875 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0281954887218 0.0255425247493 110% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0093984962406 0.0127820249294 74% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2983.0 2731.13054187 109% => OK
No of words: 465.0 446.07635468 104% => OK
Chars per words: 6.41505376344 6.12365571057 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.57801047555 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.432258064516 0.378187486979 114% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.309677419355 0.287650121315 108% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.25376344086 0.208842608468 122% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.169892473118 0.135150697306 126% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97377756209 2.79052419416 107% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 207.018472906 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486021505376 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 55.3003884115 52.1807786196 106% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.039408867 110% => OK
Sentence length: 21.1363636364 23.2022227129 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7207075606 57.7814097925 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.590909091 141.986410481 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1363636364 23.2022227129 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.590909090909 0.724660767414 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 52.1041055718 51.9672348444 100% => OK
Elegance: 1.91304347826 1.8405768891 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.361086530431 0.441005458295 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.112427474333 0.135418324435 83% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0866164986564 0.0829849096947 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.573909527834 0.58762219726 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.133818199794 0.147661913831 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137484919272 0.193483328276 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648257728818 0.0970749176394 67% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.359229609361 0.42659136922 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0354726396378 0.0774707102158 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.229940798093 0.312017818177 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0447567680642 0.0698173142475 64% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.82512315271 166% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => 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: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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: This is not the final score. 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.