Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about the Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.
It might seem logical, at the first glance, to accord with Dr. Karp's conclusion of children in Tertia island spend more time talking about their biological parents and perhaps study of Dr. Field that is an observation-centered process is not valid and flawless to determine the argument. However, we required a lot more evidence to evaluate the argument with the exegesis of interview results as well as the exact data of the observation-centered report. The argument might end up with a much weak or strong conclusion based on more evidence and proofs.
Firstly, Dr, field study of Terita island was twenty years ago with the observation basis. The Tertia might have changed dramatically over the past years. The development and advancement on the island might be brought a myriad change in their lifestyle, habitat, and many more things. For example, in the interviewed years other groups of communities like westerners might have settled on the island and they introduce the western lifestyle and mores of family tradition. In that case, Dr.karp's study might be correct and weaken the Dr, field conclusion explicitly.
Secondly, another piece of an element that has been conducive to evaluate the statistical details of which area or locality of Tertia that Dr, the field has studied through their observation-centered method. If we were to learn that they might never interview the tertian child which will weaken his conclusion. Additionally, a case report of age criterion also not provided which might be proved conducive to prejudice that exactly which age group has Dr. Field interviewed which will bolster Dr. Fields result.
Moreover, to evaluate the complete argument we need the incisive study of interview questions by dr Karp which will show that exactly what questions Dr asked a group of community. The mere fact that even though if children talking more about their biological parents other than their rearing parents that do was not meant that they are raised by their biological parents. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp's argument if it turned out that children said things like how much they missed their biological parents or how their parents left them in a communal environment. hence, without knowing what the children said it is hard to accept Dr. Karp's conclusion.
It is might be perplexing to evaluate the argument based on the paucity of evidence. To evaluate more interesting and significant fact about dr Karp study of interview base study need more exact data of all the question and answer about the interview. To amply evaluate the claim we need more study like historical evidence of tertian island or metaanalysis of hundred of anthropological studies.
In totality, we need to have more pieces of evidence to render the claim fully. In the case of dr. Karp, we need to know more about exact data of the interview and on the other hand, we need to know more historical content of the backdrop of proofs to evaluate dr fields extrapolation without more proofs it is merely conjectured to prejudice the claim.
- Some people believe that in order to be effective political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently c 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Face to face communication is better than other types of communication such as letters emails or telephone calls Give specific examples 73
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future 58
- Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia Using an observation centered approach to studying Tertian culture he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by the 66
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places 66
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 208, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ough their observation-centered method. If we were to learn that they might never ...
^^
Line 4, column 576, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Hence
...ts left them in a communal environment. hence, without knowing what the children said...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, for example, talking about, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2555.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 504.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06944444444 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87219840054 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440476190476 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 785.7 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.2740479608 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.666666667 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52380952381 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194947822469 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713484739598 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713619676611 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111157692746 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582445127326 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 208, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ough their observation-centered method. If we were to learn that they might never ...
^^
Line 4, column 576, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Hence
...ts left them in a communal environment. hence, without knowing what the children said...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, for example, talking about, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 55.5748502994 135% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2555.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 504.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06944444444 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87219840054 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440476190476 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 785.7 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.2740479608 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.666666667 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52380952381 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194947822469 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713484739598 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713619676611 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111157692746 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582445127326 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.