Please evaluate my Issue and Argument Task -- Gre soon!

[dkellogg94]

Hello! GRE on August 11th. I know these two essay weren't my best but I'm under a time crunch today. If someone could please give them a ballpark score I would appreciate it! I did not go back and edit so I know the grammar is probably not the best but any advice is helpful!

 

Also, any advice on introductions for issue or argument tasks? I'm not sure if we can just jump into it or if rephrasing the prompt in any manner is preferred? 

 

Thank you. 

 

 

Issue Task 

 

"The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones" 

 

 

While this practice may be advantageous in some contexts, teaching should primarily aim to improve students or trainees abilities. If one focuses on praising positive actions but ignores negative actions, there is little room for improvement or learning from one’s mistakes or shortcomings. 

 

There should be a balance between praise and constructive criticism. If someone is only told about their successes and positive actions, they may not be aware of the negative actions they have committed. Whether this lack of awareness stems from ignorance or from blatant disregard of the effects of one’s actions, constructive criticism is a necessary tool in teaching. 

 

In addition to bringing things one needs to work on to light, focusing on negative actions in a constructive manner can lead to solving or limiting future negative actions. Instead, ignoring negative actions will rarely lead to any positive change. In fact, ignoring negative actions can lead one to believe that they are doing nothing wrong and reinforce these behaviors as acceptable. 

 

Finally, ignoring negative actions does not address the root of the problem. Teaching should center on the improvement of its students or disciples, which requires change on the students part. As stated, one cannot improve in regards to negative behavior unless these issues are addressed through constructive criticism.

 

For example, when a police officer in training demonstrates negative behaviors, it is advantageous to tell them when their demeanor is counter-productive or contradictory to the code a police officer is expected to uphold. This can be easily fixed by speaking to the trainee and working together to figure out how to fix the negative actions for the future rather than ignoring these actions and hoping they stop. 

 

In the context of an elementary school classroom, praising positive actions supersedes addressing negative actions. However, schoolteachers know that they must address negative actions as well. Through anti-bullying programs, time-out chairs, and cooperative activities, down to the elementary school level it is advantageous to praise positive actions as well as work on addressing negative actions. 

 

The argument mentions one teaching method, which in theory sounds beneficial. In practice, however, it is disadvantageous. There are constructive ways to address negative actions while still focusing on positive actions, too. This manner of teaching, wherein negative actions are addressed, should be preferred over one where negative actions are simply ignored and reinforced. 

 

 

 

ARGUMENT TASK 

 

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 observaation that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own boilogical parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of island that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about theri 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 ovservation--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 accurte understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."

 

 

In order to assess the argument proposed by Dr. Karp, additional evidence is necessary to back up or refute his claims. The difference in methodology, along with possible differences among subjects and place or time could influence the validity of his argument. 

 

The data collected from the observations is compared with data collected from a interviews. However, we do not know whether the questions in the interview were framed a particular way, perhaps focusing on the child’s relationship with their parents or caregivers. Similarly, observations could have taken place in any setting in the village but we are not given this information. Dr. Karp’s claim that interviews assess child-rearing practices more accurately would be strengthened given evidence that the manner of observation and interview were both without biases and framing. If Dr. Karp’s grad students did frame their questions in a particular way and Dr. Field simply observed different settings, then the argument would be weakened. 

 

In addition, the interviews conducted by Dr. Karp’s team occur 20 years after the observations by Dr. Field. It is possible, although we cannot ascertain, that the new generation of children in Tertia are raised the same as the generation 20 years prior. If this evidence was provided, it would strengthen Dr. Karp’s claims. However, it is likely that the population and child-rearing practices changed over the last two decades and thus Dr. Karp’s observed differences may be a factor of time rather than fact. If time change can account for the observed differences, then Dr. Karp’s argument is weakened. 

 

Finally, Dr. Field conducted his observations on the island of Tertia, while Dr. Karp interviewed children on the “group of islands that includes Tertia”. While the islands may have similar cultural practices, Dr. Field’s study focused only on Tertia and thus Dr. Karp cannot compare one population to multiple populations in the same island grouping. Although, if Dr. Karp is basing his argument on the subset of interviews from Tertia alone, then the argument is strengthened. Only then can he assess changes in a particular island because he is comparing them to the same island’s culture in Dr. Field’s study. 

 

This argument lacks a number of important pieces of evidence, which can help to strengthen or weaken the validity of Dr. Karp’s claims. Discrepancies in time, place, and methodology may account for the difference in results between the two studies. So, additional information is required.