در صورتی که اشکالی در ترجمه می بینید می توانید از طریق شماره زیر در واتساپ نظرات خود را برای ما بفرستید
09331464034
Topic:
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.
بیست سال پیش، دکتر فیلد، یک انسان شناس برجسته، از جزیره ترتیا بازدید کرد. وی با استفاده از یک رویکرد مشاهده محور برای مطالعه فرهنگ ترتیان، از مشاهدات خود نتیجه گرفت که کودکان در ترتیا به جای والدین بیولوژیکی خود توسط کل دهکده تربیت می شوند. اخیراً یک انسان شناس دیگر، دکتر کارپ، از گروه جزایری که شامل ترتیا هستند بازدید کرد و از روش مصاحبه محور برای مطالعه روشهای تربیت کودک استفاده کرد. در مصاحبه هایی که دکتر کارپ با کودکان ساکن این گروه از جزایر انجام داده است، کودکان زمان بسیار بیشتری را صرف گفتگو در مورد والدین بیولوژیکی خود نسبت به سایر بزرگسالان در روستا کرده اند. دکتر کارپ تصمیم گرفت که نتیجه گیری دکتر فیلد در مورد فرهنگ دهکده ترتیان معتبر نیست. برخی از انسان شناسان توصیه می کنند برای به دست آوردن اطلاعات دقیق در مورد روشهای تربیت کودک ترتیان، تحقیقات بیشتری در مورد این موضوع باید از طریق روش مصاحبه محور انجام شود.
پاسخی بنویسید که در آن درباره اینکه چه سوالاتی باید پاسخ داده شود تا بدانید که آیا توصیه و استدلالی که بر مبنای آن استوار است منطقی است یا نه بحث کنید. حتماً توضیح دهید که چگونه پاسخ این سوالات به ارزیابی توصیه کمک می کند.
NOTE: The above topic has wording similar to Argument Tasks 19 and 21 of this Website. However, if you read carefully you will notice that the topic and the task instructions are different. Hence, it is very important to read the topic as well as its instructions completely before you start to write your response.
• بر طبق متن دکتر Field یک انسان شناس برجسته می باشد ولی شاید دکتر Karl به اندازه دکتر Field معروف و برجسته نباشد و هدفش کسب شهرت از طریق مقابله با دکتر Field باشد.
• مشخص نیست دکتر Field چه مشاهداتی داشته و بر چه اساسی این نتیجه گیری را کرده است.
• دکتر Field بیست سال پیش تحقیقات خود را در این جزیره انجام داده است. در حالیکه دکتر Karl اخیرا این تحقیقات را انجام داده و خیلی از متغییر ها در این مدت تغییر کرده اند.
• دکتر Karl چندین جزیره را باهم بررسی کرده است و نمیتواند نتایج را فقط به جزیره Tertia مربوط دانست.
• باید شرایط بچه ها و افراد این جزیره را در مورد پرگویی بررسی کرد چون احتمالا پرحرفی بر نتایج روش مصاحبه محور تاثیر گذار باشد.
• ضمنا تعداد بچه هایی که با دکتر Karl مصاحبه کرده اند مشخص نیست و اعتبار این نتیجه زیر سوال می رود.
• معمولا نتایج مربوط به مصاحبه نمیتواند کاملا قابل استناد باشه چرا که سوال و جواب هایی که از کودکان باشه بر اساس تصوراتشون باشه تا واقعیت.
• با تمام این موضوعات مشخص نیست چرا نویسنده نظر برخی انسان شناس ها به عنوان نتیجه و برآیند موضوع اعلام میکند و میگوید برای اطلاعات دقیقتر باید روش مصاحبه محور درپیش گرفته شود. شاید روش مشاهده محور (با از بین بردن اشکالات آن که ذکر شد) حتی مناسب تر هم باشد.
• هر دو روش میتواند نتایج نادرستی داشته باشد. ضمنا در مورد سوالات مصاحبه و روش مشاهده چیزی عنوان نشده است.
Strategies:
Regardless of the approach you take, consider the following steps:
a) Is there an alternative explanation for the events in question that can invalidate, either in whole or in part, the explanation given in the passage?
b) How can I break the argument into its component parts to understand how they create the whole argument?
c) Can I identify the line of reasoning used to create the argument?
d) What does the author of the argument assume to be true for the argument to be true?
e) Does the line of reasoning validate the conclusion?
f) Can I imagine an example that refutes any or several of the statements in the argument?
g) Am I able to evaluate the argument based on the quality of the facts and reasons presented in it
Based on your responses to all or some of these questions, you must present a well-developed evaluation of the argument. You should take brief notes when you identify the arguments claims, assumptions, and conclusion. Jot down as many alternative explanations as you can along with additional evidence that might support or refute the claims in the argument. Finally, list the changes in the argument that would make the reasoning more solid. It is more important to be specific than it is to have a long list of evidence and examples.
This argument cites the results of two studies concerning child-rearing practices on the island of Tertia and the group of islands that includes Tertia and makes a recommendation about further research.
In developing your response, you are required to generate questions that will help you decide if the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable and then explain how the answers to your questions would help evaluate the recommendation. It might be helpful to isolate the recommendation.
Recommendation:
To obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.
Next, identify the argument’s conclusions and the evidence that led to those conclusions.
Claims and assumptions:
a) Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. This assumption supports the recommendation to conduct further studies using the interview-based approach. Later studies seem to negate Field’s findings.
b) The observation – centered approach yields inaccurate results. This unstated assumption underlies the recommendation that, in order to obtain accurate results, further studies should be conducted using the interview-based approach.
c) The interview-centered method yields accurate results. The conclusions in Karp’s research seem to justify this conclusion. This assumption supports the recommendation.
d) Some anthropologists recommend the interview-centered approach for future research.
e) You should now be able to generate some questions that could clarify or weaken the argument.
Questions:
a) If the interview-centered approach had been used before the observation-centered approach, would the second results have invalidated those first results?
b) What kinds of questions were included in the interviews?
c) What outside influences may have arisen in the twenty years between the two studies? Have the women in the islands gone outside of the home to work? Have television and/or the Internet become available? Think about the ways in which your own community has changed in the last twenty years.
d) Has the family structure undergone any changes in the twenty years between the two studies? Are families having fewer children?
e) What other islands were included in Dr. Karp’s study? Were child-rearing practices similar on all of the islands?
f) Are the results of each study both valid and reliable? Did the studies indeed measure what they were intended to measure? If the same study were done again, would the results be the same?
g) Did Dr. Fields’ study make the people of Tertia reconsider their method of child-rearing? His questions may have caused them to reflect upon the way they perform this task.
Your notes do not have to be exhaustive. As you begin to write your essay, your brain will generate new ideas. Make certain that you keep the directions in mind as you develop your ideas. Use as many or as few paragraphs as you consider appropriate for your argument, but create a new paragraph when you move on to a new idea or example of support for your position. The GRE readers are not looking for a specific number of ideas or paragraphs. Instead, they are reading to determine the level of understanding of the topic and the complexity with which you respond.
You are free to organize and develop your response in any way you think will enable you to effectively communicate your evaluation of the argument. You may recall writing strategies that you learned in high school or a writing-intensive course that you took in college, but it is not necessary to employ any of those strategies. It is important that your ideas follow a logical progression and display strong critical thinking.
NOTE: The above topic has wording similar to Argument Tasks 19 and 21 of this Website. However, if you read carefully you will notice that the topic and the task instructions are different. Hence, it is very important to read the topic as well as its instructions completely before you start to write your response.
Sample 1:
Change in virtually every society around the world is occurring at almost lightning speed. Tertia and the group of islands to which it belongs are not likely to be immune to change. If we assume that Dr. Field’s conclusions were appropriate twenty years ago, we must ask ourselves if events during the intervening years may have changed the child-rearing practices that he observed. Exposure to other people visiting the island, access to television and the Internet, and even people leaving the island would influence future studies of the culture. Dr. Field’s study, alone, could have caused the residents of Tertia to question their child-rearing practices and, as a result, modify them. Dr. Karp’s recent study, regardless of the technique he used, could not fail to yield different results than the earlier study. Playing devil’s advocate for a moment, let’s reverse the order of the studies. Assume that Dr. Karp completed his study using the interview-centered approach and that, twenty years later Dr. Field arrived at the island and used his observation-centered approach to complete his study. The results would most certainly still disagree with each other. In this case, do Dr. Field’s results invalidate those of Dr. Karp?
The scope of each study appears to be different, as well. Dr. Field allegedly studied only the families on the island of Tertia while Dr. Karp visited the group of islands that includes Tertia. The fact that the subjects were different for each event is enough to nullify one’s superiority over the other. It also appears that Dr. Field observed the culture of Tertia as a whole, while Karp focused on child-rearing practices. Having used two variants of research procedures, the anthropologists were destined to achieve unreliable results.
We should take a closer look at the approaches that each anthropologist adopted. As Field employed the observation- centered method to study the culture of Tertia, what did he observe in addition to child-rearing practices? One could infer that those practices were a small, perhaps even minor, portion of his entire project. On the other hand, Karp’s project, using an interview-centered method, seems to have ignored other aspects of the culture. Why would a group of scientists use these disparate studies as a basis for further research?
Overall, the results of these studies have too much dissimilarity and leave too many questions unanswered to use them as justification for more research using either one of the methods mentioned in the argument. The author of the argument may have more information than he has seen fit to reveal and, thus, may be qualified to sit in judgment of the methods and the results. However, based on what has been revealed here, the recommendation is based on flawed reasoning.
نظرات کاربران
هنوز نظری درج نشده است!
