Topic
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.


RESPONSE:
Although there may be some merit to Dr. Karp's argument that the interview-centered method (IC method)they and their graduate students are using to understand the child-rearing traditions of Tertia and other island cultures is better than the observation-centered method (OC method) of Dr. Field,there is still some evidence that needs to be considered before legitimizing their claim.

The first piece of evidence that Dr. Karp should attain is what the sample of the population of the OB method was the focus of the observation. If Dr. Field only observed a small group of children of the Tertian village, then it may not have been representative of the entire Tertian culture. As well, did Dr. Field observe only the children, or the adults and older adults as well, as all age groups would better represent the culture and traditions of the Tertian people as a whole. Evidence on whether the OB method reserahced an appropriate representation of the Tertain people would help determine if it was a valid form of research on the Tertain people.

Not only should evidence be collected on who was observed, but for how long. If the OB method only observes the population of interest for a year, then that may not produce a valid representation of the traditions of the Tertain or other island people. However, if the OB method was done over 50 years, or at least spanning two generations, then if may better represent how child-rearing stays constant or how it changes based on various influences of differnt time periods. This may also strengthen Dr. Karp's arugment, in that IC method may be able to collect information that would span multi-generations without have to passively observe for that many years. With the IC method, you may be able to speak to a child, a parent, and a grandparent to gather the information that one would get by observing the same family for 50 years.

There also has to be evidence collected on the content of both the IC and the OB methods. It could be that the questions used in the IC method were leading, and therefore producing response from the children where they talked more about their biological parents than other villagers who helped rear them. Likewise, was the OB method only observing at certain times of the day, where children may be in a group setting with many adults (such as school or educational times)? As well, how does the content collected from the IC method compare to the content of other IC method studies on the Tertain or other island cultures? What about the comparison of the OB method compared to other OB method studies done on child-rearing in island cultures? It is important for Dr. Karp to make sure that their method has been validitized through other studies, not jsut their own.