The following appeared on the Website Science News Today. “In a recent survey of more than 5,000 adolescents, the teens who reported eating the most meals with their families were the least likely to use illegal drugs, tobacco, or alcohol.
TOEFL, IELTS, Personal Statement and CV Proofreading Services. › GRE Writing › The following appeared on the Website Science News Today. “In a recent survey of more than 5,000 adolescents, the teens who reported eating the most meals with their families were the least likely to use illegal drugs, tobacco, or alcohol.
University: Wuhan University
March 6, 2020 at 4:02 am
“In a recent survey of more than 5,000 adolescents, the teens who reported eating the most meals with their families were the least likely to use illegal drugs, tobacco, or alcohol. Family meals were also associated with higher grades, better self-esteem, and lower rates of depression. Almost 30 percent of the teens said they ate at least seven meals per week with their families. Clearly, having a high number of family meals keeps teens from engaging in bad behaviors.”
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
In the letter, we are informed that teenagers having family meals more frequently tend to develop better and misbehave less frequently than their peers. To further support this argument, he ascribes some teens’ outstanding academic performance and low incidence of bad behaviors to their high frequency of having meals with their family members. While this might be the case, we cannot easily ignore other explanations which could rival the proposed one endorsed by the arguer.
To begin with, while we could readily infer from the survey that the more often adolescents have family meals, the less likely they engage in bad behaviors, this is not the only explanation. To be more specific, we should be cautious of the word “survey”, which is highly subjective and relies heavily on what the respondents reported. Since we do not know what questions researchers used to investigate those teens, nor can we learn about how many and how investigators selected samples for this study, hardly can we ensure that teenagers were frank when answering the questions, and the survey’s sample is large and diverse enough to reflect overall teenagers; consequently, we cannot rule out the possibility that some adolescents who did misbehave said that they never engaged in bad behaviors, or the researchers failed to select representative samples. In addition, by citing that students who have family meals most frequently tend to misbehave least often, the author draws the conclusion that the teenagers’ frequency of having meals with their relatives negatively correlates with their tendency of misbehaving. Without further information, we cannot unhesitatingly preclude the possibility that this detail of the study results from other factors: it’s likely, for example, that only the one who ate meals with his family members everyday reported that he never misbehaved, while the major adolescents’ incidence of misbehavior has no direct relationship with their frequency of having family meals. Either of these explanations, once proven true, could easily compete with the one proposed by the vice president.
Moreover, even if the author could preclude above explanations based on other evidence, hardly can we draw any valid conclusion from the cited data that 30% surveyed teenagers at least ate 7 meals per week. More specifically, without examining the rest of youngsters investigated by researchers, it’s entirely possible that their tendency of engaging in bad behavior is as low as the 30% adolescents who reported that they had meals with families frequently. What’s more, it will be unfair to keep blind to the possible scenario that substantial students in the 30% teenagers studied by researchers still misbehaved frequently. All of the aforementioned explanations pose a great challenge upon, if not utterly reverse, the proposed one in the argument.
Finally, granted that the survey’s result is a reliable indicator of strong relationship between teenagers’ low engagement of bad behaviors and their high frequency of attending family meals, it is doubtful that family meals are the only factor contributing to teenagers’ better personal development(e.g., high academic performance, self-esteem, etc.) mentioned in the argument. Generally speaking, adolescents’ well-being results from a variety of factors: well-rounded education, parents’ high income, to name a few. While we cannot assert that these factors are present and contribute significantly to the cultivation of youth, we are confident that these explanations could rival the one proposed in the argument.
To summarize, although it is reasonable that spending more time having meals with family members contributes to teenagers’ better future development, there are several alternative explanations that could challenge the author’s one and can also plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument. However, it is unreasonable to draw hasty conclusions about which explanation is best until further examination concerning the survey presented by the arguer is performed.
- The essay is too long. Shorten it to 400- words;
- Restrict each paragraph within 90 words;
- More than 80% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
- Nearly 40% of the sentences are passive. Convert some of them into their active counterparts.
I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.