Unanswered [0] | Urgent [0]
  

Home / Writing Feedback   % width Posts: 6


GRE Analyze an argument; Child-rearing traditions in Tertia


shadman19922 21 / 74 10  
Jul 10, 2013   #1
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.

In the arguement, Dr. Karp argues that Dr.Field's research and the method of observation research are both invalid. This argument is based on the premise that during one of Dr. Karp's interviews, the children spent more time talking about their biological parents, and it is this single statement that acts as the foundation for Dr. Karp's arguments and conclusions and it is this point that matters in the entire argument.

Now, Dr. Karp's argument may be valid and his conclusions logical. However, what the given argument lacks is the details of his analysis, and in particular the minutinae of the conversation he or his graduate students may have had with the children of Tertia. In fact, it is the details of this conversation that would reveal as to whether Dr. Karp is right or wrong. Dr. Karp's argument may have been strengthened if he mentioned that most of the conversation was about how the children were brought up. However, since the argument does not have the slightest inkling of the nature of the discourse students had with the native children, the conversation could have been about anything. It could have been about who each children live with, or it could be anything not pertinent to being brought up. If such is the case, Then the conversation and interview approach simply fails in extracting the relevant data and information.

If the interview-centered approach involves talking mostly about things other than how the children were brought up, then the single column supporting Dr. Karp's entire arguemnt simply becomes non-existence. If this is so, then the claim made about the invalidity of the original study is a complete farce and the assertion the the interview-apporach is superior remains uncorroborated.
dumi 1 / 6,925 1592  
Jul 10, 2013   #2
In the arguement, Dr. Karp argues that Dr.Field's research and the method of observation research are both invalid.

... what Dr Karp argues is that Dr Field's conclusion of Tertian village culture is invalid (not his research is invalid) and therefore his research approach (which is an observation based approach) is also invalid. This is not properly conveyed from what you have written.
OP shadman19922 21 / 74 10  
Jul 10, 2013   #3
Well, my main point was that the conversation or the types of interview questions asked were not mentioned in the prompt, since the details of the interview were not mentioned, I concluded that Dr. Karp's argument is not fully justified and tried to build up on that. Can I trouble you to show me what was wrong with the point? If possible, an alternate way to write it?

One flaw was the fact that I didn't mention that since the Children talk more about their biological parents, Karp assumed the children were brought up primarily by their parents
jkjeremy - / 380 72  
Jul 10, 2013   #4
One flaw was the fact that I didn't mention that since the Children talk more about their biological parents, Karp assumed the children were brought up primarily by their parents

You're smart to have caught this omission.

This paper is a bit too short for an upper-half score.

Make a list of missing points of evidence and post them here in bullet form.

Post them here.

Here's what I mean:

what the given argument lacks is the details of his analysis,

This is really the main idea of the essay. (It should have been your thesis.) Your job is to identify which details are missing and then tell me how their absence weakens his argument.

You've partially accomplished the task but your discussion wanders around quite a bit.
OP shadman19922 21 / 74 10  
Jul 11, 2013   #5
I guess I should take a break from mindlessly writing "Analyze an argument" essays in a vain attempt to improve and just focus on past mistakes.
jkjeremy - / 380 72  
Jul 12, 2013   #6
Don't stop practicing!

However, you are right that you shouldn't do so "mindlessly." Millions of kids (not that you're a child or anything) just practice without knowing what they're doing. That's why the world is full of threes and fours on the GRE (and every essay test, really).

If you'd like, I can give you my email and I can give you more detailed advice.


Home / Writing Feedback / GRE Analyze an argument; Child-rearing traditions in Tertia
Writing
Editing Help?
Fill in one of the forms below to get professional help with your assignments:

Graduate Writing / Editing:
GraduateWriter form ◳

Best Essay Service:
CustomPapers form ◳

Excellence in Editing:
Rose Editing ◳

AI-Paper Rewriting:
Robot Rewrite ◳