“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 that 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’s argument follows a logical line of reasoning but fails to provide sufficient evidence for all the claims made in the article. Karp needs to better support the claims refuting Dr. Field’s argument, the conclusions of Tertia children being raised by their biological parents, and the sweeping generalization that observation-centered approach in studying cultures is invalid. To secure sufficient evidence of such claims, Karp needs to address methods of how evidence was collected, take precautions against and acknowledge possible bias, and more thoroughly explain why certain conclusions are made.
To successfully refute a claim such as Dr. Field’s, which suggests the children of Tertia are raised by the village rather than biological parents, Karp should supply the full argument and process in which Field came to their conclusions, otherwise an assessment of validity cannot be adequately made. Simply stating Dr. Field observed the island and came to this conclusion leaves the reader with an incomplete picture of Dr. Field’s full argument. What about Dr. Field’s observations led them to believe the children were reared by the whole village? How long did Dr. Field observe? How many of the Tertia people were observed? How did Dr. Field decipher the biological parents apart from the rest of the village? Answering these questions would provide the reader with adequate information to see how Karp came to the conclusion of Field’s invalidity.
Dr. Karp declares the children of Tertia are actually raised by their biological parents because the interviews suggest the children discuss their biological parents more. Such a claim cannot be made simply based on information of certain saturated subjects. What if the questions of the interview only asked the Tertia children about their biological parents? What did the children say about their biological parents? The substantial presence of a subject does not confirm certain claims about the subject. To support Karp’s claim, the content and methods of the interviews need to be divulged. Otherwise, the reasoning will suggest a large leap in logic.
Without a more descriptive and detailed account of the two processes of research, neither Dr. Field’s or Dr. Karp’s conclusions can be confirmed or denied, nor can a claim about the two methods be made. Dr. Karp provides no reason to believe the interview technique is any better than the observation technique, other than the antithesis nature of both findings. The best way to secure validity would be to prove the interview technique is the least biased and is more wholistic than the observation bias. For Karp’s interview to be as unbiased as possible it should not only include interviews from the children but also the biological parents.
and other villagers, the questions should not include questions that might suggest the child rearing method, and the conclusions drawn from the interviews needs to account for the cultural differences between the interviewers and interviewees. Interpretation bias exists in both observation method and interview method because the researchers are analyzing their findings. To truly claim the interview method is superior, Karp needs to address the ways such a method would acquire more valid and unbiased information.
In conclusion, Dr. Karp’s arguments are not necessarily wrong but they are not sufficiently proven to be considered correct. Providing more information on the methods of the acquired evidence, processes of how each researcher came to their conclusions, and corroboration of unbiased measures, Karp could more successfully claim Field’s arguments as false, Karp’s true, and the interview method as the ideal approach of cultural research.
- “SuperCorp recently moved its headquarters to Corporateville. The recent surge in the number of homeowners in Corporateville proves that Corporateville is a superior place to live than Middlesburg, the home of SuperCorp's original headquarters. Moreover 82
- 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 66
- The following advice was given to a politician by his political consultant: It is true that 200 apartment renters protested in the rain about the elimination of rent control regulation. However, there are 20,000 renters in the entire city. 19,800 of them 69
- Universities should require students to take courses only within those fields they are interested in studying.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 66
- “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 wi 55
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 581 350
No. of Characters: 3095 1500
No. of Different Words: 233 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.91 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.327 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.833 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 248 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 198 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 135 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.346 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.698 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.269 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 645, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...any of the Tertia people were observed? How did Dr. Field decipher the biological p...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, so, apart from, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3217.0 2260.96107784 142% => OK
No of words: 581.0 441.139720559 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53700516351 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90957651803 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03820265035 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42512908778 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 954.9 705.55239521 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 88.0650123488 57.8364921388 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.68 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.24 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.52 5.70786347227 44% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276499503398 0.218282227539 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100160666008 0.0743258471296 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0744976824848 0.0701772020484 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156529649991 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0829743403498 0.0628817314937 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => 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: 15.15 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 98.500998004 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.