Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture
The argument that, based on the interviews conducted, it can be said that Dr Field's conclusion is invalid, is based on flawed assumptions and is therefore, not cogent. It does not take into account many possibilities and does not provide evidence needed to support such assumptions.
Firstly, the argument bases it conclusion on the fact that interviews yielded a result which was different from the result yielded by the first study. Yet, it does not account for how many interviews were conducted or if all children residing on these islands were interviewed. It is possible that out a ten thousand children only hundred were interviewed. Unless evidence is provided which states the number of children interviewed, it would be incorrect and wrong to draw a conclusion from this assumption.
Secondly, the argument also draws its conclusion from the assumption that since the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village, they must not be reared by the village but by their parents. No evidence regarding whether the children talk about them because they long for their company and love is provided. It is possible that the children want to spend more time with their parents and thus talked about what they desired. Unless explicitly stated why they talked about their biological parents more, we cannot conclude that such a child rearing practice did not take place and the first study was invalid.
The argument bases its conclusion on two different studies which were conducted over a span of 20 years. It does not take into account that it is enough time for practices to change. It is possible that when Dr Field visited the child rearing practice differed from when Dr Karp visited. This would have lead Dr Karp to conclude differently. This would not prove Dr Field's conclusion invalid but only state that practices, values have changed on these islands during the last 20 years. Hence it would be wrong to assume that research should be conducted via the interview centered method and not the observation centered method.
The questions stated above will help evaluate the recommendation and based on the answers provided, the recommendation can allow for accomodating new ideas and approaches.Unless specific evidence is provided to re-examine the two studies, both of which are then re-analysed to take into account the time factor and the evidence which is missing, the argument will remain flawed and will lack coherence.
- The following argument was made in a newspaper editorial:“The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangere 83
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar. 54
- Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks. 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
- Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men 53
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The questions stated above will help evaluate the recommendation and based on the answers provided, the recommendation can allow for accomodating new ideas and approaches.Unless specific evidence is provided to re-examine the two studies, both of which are then re-analysed to take into account the time factor and the evidence which is missing, the argument will remain flawed and will lack coherence.
Error: re-examine Suggestion: reexamine
Error: accomodating Suggestion: accommodating
---------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 411 350
No. of Characters: 2056 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.503 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.002 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.552 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.176 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.07 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.328 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.328 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 486, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...these islands during the last 20 years. Hence it would be wrong to assume that resear...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 171, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Unless
...r accomodating new ideas and approaches.Unless specific evidence is provided to re-exa...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, such as, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2094.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 410.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10731707317 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69183001692 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482926829268 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 631.8 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 4.96107784431 242% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.0823361015 57.8364921388 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.176470588 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1176470588 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.82352941176 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => 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 : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.128558354198 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0467962457522 0.0743258471296 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0347490332458 0.0701772020484 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0659082262141 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.050446083357 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.