cherokeecierra

Hey again everyone! In need of feedback on an argument essay. It's posted below. Prompt: 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 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. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation. My Response: The overall conclusion to use more interview-based data collection, although tempting to accept, is not fully reasonable. Because the nature of anthropological studies is based upon multiple study methods, the comparison of various sets of data, and long term observation, reliance on one form of observation is not a wise scientific decision. Although interviews are a valid form of data collection, the fact remains that interviews alone are not strong enough to draw conclusions such as the one made by Dr. Karp, invalidating information gathered by other researchers. In order to deem this argument as reasonable, several questions revolving around the reliability and validity of study methods must be asked. First, how reliable is the interview-based method that both anthropologists utilized in their respective studies? Additionally, how many interviews were conducted, how frequently were they conducted, and what types of questions were included? If the interviews focused solely on the role of the Tertian children’s biological parents’ role in child rearing, then the resulting data may be skewed with information biased towards, against, or only pertaining to the biological parents. Similarly, if the interview questions focus on the ways in which the Tertian children’s villages support or stunt their growth, then there may be room for interviewees’ answers to be skewed in favor or against villagers as well. There is not enough information about the interviews’ details to make a conclusive statement that only interviews should be utilized in studies such as this one. Another question we may ask is whether or not interview-centered methods of data collection can stand on their own as valid. Does an interview need to be coupled with another form of observation in order to be a legitimate way to make conclusive assumptions? Does an interview only provide one piece of the data, whereas long-term observational studies, for example, may yield more detailed data? If a researcher decided to replicate Dr. Field’s study using a year long study in which interviews and naturalistic observational methods (e.g. watching and recording the ways in which villagers versus biological parents teach children important survival skills), then it may be assumed that the coupling of these two methods would yield more conclusive and wholesome data. In other words, it is important to take different approaches to the same problem in order to determine the reliability of a method or the results one collects. Finally, one might ask whether or not the aforementioned conclusions can be made if there are only two anthropologists who have publicly released their findings. Maybe a study such as this one requires a team of researchers to partake in or replicate the same study in order to compare data. What if another anthropologist, Dr. Sam, completed the same study, but found different results? The children may have simply responded differently to Dr. Sam, or maybe his methods of observation were more reliable or strayed from those of Dr. Field and Dr. Karp. Overall, there are too many underlying questions to answer that make this conclusion unreasonable.

Hi everyone! I'm in the midst of prepping for the GRE through Magoosh and was just assigned 2 essays for my study plan today. In Magoosh's resources, it lists this website as a place where you can post essays and hopefully get feedback from others. That said, I'm posting the first essay I wrote today, an Issue essay. I'd love any feedback or review anyone is willing to give, as I don't have a writing tutor. Please feel free to butcher as needed, this is my first attempt at a GRE essay, so I'm sure it's a bit rough. The essay is pasted below. Thanks! Much appreciated! Cherokee Washington Prompt: "The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority." Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. Often Times throughout history, authority figures, people who hold positions of power, and governmental systems are questioned by the societies they rule. It is true that those in power are elected to rule and guide the public based on their merit, rhetoric, and intentions, however, there are cases in which authority figures seek to only benefit select groups within society, rather than every member of said society. That said, I believe that the well-being of a public can be enhanced when those in power are questioned. Essay: Often Times throughout history, authority figures, people who hold positions of power, and governmental systems are questioned by the societies they rule. It is true that those in power are elected to rule and guide the public based on their merit, rhetoric, and intentions, however, there are cases in which authority figures seek to only benefit select groups within society, rather than every member of said society. That said, I believe that the well-being of a public can be enhanced when those in power are questioned. Within American history, we see a pattern of questioning authoritative figures on countless occasions since the beginning of our nation’s establishment. Take the system of slavery for example. Perhaps one of the most detrimental financial and prejudiced decisions made by European slave traders, slavery in the United States has damaged our society in more ways than one. By capturing and enslaving people with dark skin that strayed from the ideals of whiteness, Europeans created a monster of a system that caused people to become indentured to their masters, become separated from their families, live and work in unfathomable conditions, and even lose their lives. More importantly, slavery and the concepts of racial hierarchy that stem from it have trickled down into today’s society, leaving current members of the American population to be mistreated or slain for being Black or brown. Clearly, Oppression has taken on various iterations (some which are more tolerable today than those practiced in during the civil rights era), however this transformation of ideology was only made possible by members of society who questioned authority. If individuals such as Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, Maya Angelou, Muhammad Ali, and even Colin Kaepernick had not bravely challenged the powers that dictated their worth and privilege in this country, then many Black bodies could still be picking cotton for hours on end rather than owning companies and acting as CEO’s. Another example of beneficiary questioning of authority stems from the 2018 film, “Black Panther.” In the film, the superhero T’Challa (also known as Black Panther) is identified as the king of Wakanda, a thriving self-sufficient African country that has been untouched by the evils of colonialism. Although Wakanda is part of the greater whole of Africa, T’Challa and his Wakandan predecessors see the country’s success stemming from keeping out of international affairs. No other country (other than those in Africa) know that Wakanda exists, despite the many resources it poses to aid other societies in enhancing technology and other areas. With this initial unwillingness to keep Wakanda and its resources to itself in mind, T’Challa’s cousin Killmonger attempts to take over the throne, stating that Wakanda is wrong for not aiding its American brothers and sisters in their own struggle against colonial powers. Ultimately, though Killmonger approach is more damaging than beneficial to all Black and brown bodies throughout the world, T’Challa decides to extend those resources out to America and help minorities enhance their own cities, thus bettering society as a whole through the betterment of all lives, not just white lives. In all, through these two examples of questioning authority, we see both pros and cons to said questioning. Although systems can be well-run within a society and not need be enhanced, (e.g. acceptance of the first amendment) there are certain systems that benefit only one part of society while harming others. In order to fully benefit every member of a society, we must take into account those who may be at a detriment and make things fair.